Ian Walker

Ian Walker – Child Law Specialist Solicitor and Mediator

Residence Orders

The Children Act 1989 introduced Residence and Contact Orders.

Residence Orders determined where a child resided (lived).

Contact Orders determined when and how a child spent time with a parent and other important family members who they were not residing with.

Before Residence there was Custody

Residence Orders and Contact Orders replaced Custody Orders and Access Orders. The orders did the same thing, but the terminology of Residence and Contact was different, and also an improvement.

legal 500 leading firm logoThe idea of the Children Act was very much to modernise the law relating to children. This revised terminology was significantly more child focused and a vast improvement.

The problem with access and custody was that the terminology kind of suggested that a child was imprisoned or owned by one parent and the other parent was lucky to be able to access time with them. Also, the terminology was framed in a very adult way…. An adult had custody of the child; an adult had access to the child. Critics said that terminology suggested that the adult was more important than the child.

Placing the child first

Kris Seed – Senior Chartered Legal Executive – Head of Private Law Children Team

The terminology for Residence and Contact Orders made clear that the child was centre stage. Now orders were framed with the child as the most important person (in line with other aspects of the Children Act). The child has contact with… The child resides with…

As well as the welfare principle (which is that the child’s welfare is the most important consideration in any decision making), the Children Act also contains the no order principle.

The No Order Principle

The No Order Principle of the Children Act says;

When the court is considering whether or not to make one or more orders under the Children Act 1989 with respect to a child, it must not make the order unless it considers that doing so would be better for the child than making no order at all.

Note the use of the word must.

The underlying idea was to encourage parents to talk and to agree arrangements rather than the default position being that the parents needed to have a court order which set out what their arrangements would be.

Joint Custody

Pre-Children Act Orders were often that parents would have joint custody of their children and/or that one parent had custody of the children and the other parent had reasonable access.

The no order principle remains in place, but over time there was increasing pressure for joint residence orders. Whilst terminology is important – the importance to parents as a point of contention as to who had residence (a residence order) and who had contact (only contact),(and why not joint residence?) started to become a distraction. They original point of the no order principle was to encourage parents to sort out reasonable arrangements without having to involve the court.

The Children and Families Act 2014

In April 2014 the Children and Families Act 2014 came into effect. This amended the Children Act.

In particular the Children and Families Act 2014 removed from the Children Act the definitions of residence order and contact order. Residence and Contact Orders were replaced by Child Arrangement Orders.

A Child Arrangement Orders is an order relating to:

whom a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact with, and

when a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact with any person

Child Arrangement Orders will say that a child lives with one parent and spends time with the other parent. But a child arrangements order can also say that a child lives with one parent (in a defined way) and then lives with the other parent (in another defined way). A child living with both parents under a child arrangements order does not mean 50/50 time (although it could do).

Children living with both parents for different periods of time in a week reflects the reality/practicalities of life but is much less likely to diminish (in the eyes of one or both parents) the importance of the parent with whom the child spends less time. Even with Residence and Contact Orders the parents who had Residence could use the tag of residence to diminish the role of the other parent (in circumstances where the parents could and should be working together).

Residence Orders are no more

So, Residence Orders are no more.

Language is important and the move to Child Arrangements Orders has been a step forward.

Our team are specialists in Children Law. If you need any assistance we are ready to help

Latest News

Mixed messages from latest Family Court statistics

The Ministry of Justice has published its latest Family Court statistics for cases dealt with by the Family Courts, for the quarter October to December 2020, and the messages sent by the statistics are somewhat mixed.

Read more
We are participating in the Family Mediation Voucher Scheme – worth £500 towards the cost of family mediation

The purpose of the scheme is to promote the benefits of family mediation and to encourage families with suitable cases to mediate – rather than to take their cases to the family courts.

Read more
Research provides insight into child applications made by mothers and fathers

We wrote here last month about research carried out by The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (‘NFJO’), which carries out research with the aim of improving the family justice system, into who is going to court to resolve children disputes

Read more
The consequences of lying to the court

As everyone knows, anyone involved in court proceedings should tell the court “nothing but the truth”.  This applies not just to giving oral evidence at court hearings, but to every dealing with the court

Read more
Why it is so important to legalise an agreement

As we will see in a moment, those involved in disputes over financial arrangements on separation/divorce are constantly being implored by judges, lawyers and others to resolve the dispute by agreement. But simply reaching an agreement isn’t

Read more
The importance of confidentiality in mediation

A High Court judgment published last week both highlights and confirms the importance of confidentiality in mediation between separating couples.

Read more
Team Member Briony Phillips helps with the Exeter Bomb

World War II Exeter bomb. Over the weekend it was widely reported in the national mediator that a very large – eight-foot – World War II and unexploded bomb had been found in Exeter.

Read more
Who owns court documents?

Court proceedings can generate a vast quantity of documents. These include applications, statements and, most importantly, judgments and orders. Normally of course the court, the parties and their lawyers will access court documents

Read more
Welcome to Lisa Holden and Elle West and Julia Sacco

We are delighted to welcome solicitors Lisa Holden and Julia Sacco and Elle West to our team. This takes our legal team to 16 qualified lawyers supported by 8 trainee and future trainee lawyers and means that we are comfortably amongst the

Read more
What is matrimonial property, and why is it important?

In a recent case the Court of Appeal had to consider whether a certain asset comprised ‘matrimonial property’. But what is matrimonial property, and why is it important?

Read more
Research suggests separated parents in deprived areas more likely to use family courts

As we all know, the distribution of wealth in England is not evenly spread. Many areas of the country are poorer than others, and that certainly applies to parts of the ‘catchment area’ of Ian Walker Family Law and Mediation Solicitors.

Read more
Husband not entitled to rent from wife who occupied matrimonial home

When a couple divorce the former matrimonial home can be sold. (What happens will depend on the needs of the family). If this happens, it may take some months. Until the sale is completed just one party will normally remain in occupation.

Read more