According to a recent speech by Andrew Walker QC, the thread that binds the legal process together, the Rule of Law, (The authority and influence of law in society – the main pillar of the Rule of Law being that all members of a society, including the government, police, and any other powers, are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes), is under threat as a result of cuts being made to legal aid relating to family law and those in need of their nearest solicitors dealing in criminal law. MG Legal’s team of solicitors in Preston, and many other local family law solicitors have noticed that the much of the public are unaware of the cuts, and our solicitors in Lancaster, Lancashire still receive requests for legal aid from clients on a daily basis. 

In many divorce matters, both spouses want matters to be resolved as quickly as possible, and they likely want an outcome of financial matters that suits their situation. However, despite the emotional experience that you may be going through during the divorce, it is important to make the right decisions and to follow the financial process set out by the Court, to ensure that you get the settlement that you are entitled to. 

When you purchase a property with someone else it is called “co-ownership” and all cases of co-ownership tend to give rise to a trust of land. 

 

With any form of co-ownership all of the legal co-owners must join in any future disposition of the property. If there was a dispute which when to court, for example, then the Court may make whatever order it sees fit but the Courts will generally take into account why the property was bought. 

During Family Law Proceedings, the Judges have numerous options open to them when considering what terms to set within an Order. 

 

If parties cannot reach an agreement between themselves outside of Court, and after attempting mediation, then your Solicitors in Lancaster would suggest issuing proceedings in Court to help finalise financial matters relating to the divorce. 

Dissolution Proceedings are one of the legal way to end a Civil Partnership. Family Solicitors Preston explain that, like marriage, these proceedings cannot be issued if the parties have been in a Civil Partnership for less than a year. Also, like marriage, there is only one ground for a dissolution: that the partnership has broken down irretrievably. There are five facts which the Petitioner (the issuing party) can proceed on the basis of. These are the same as those used in divorce proceedings, and can be found in Family Solicitors Preston’s blog here. If you are unsure what fact you can rely on, your Family Solicitors Preston will be able to advise you. 

When couples end up in Court proceedings relating to financial matters connected to a divorce, they do not always expect the seriousness of the matter. Quite often, people explain how they did not realise the involvement that they would be required to have, until they spoke to family solicitors Lancaster, MG Legal. 

Not that long ago, our Lancaster Solicitors explained how the Government were now considering expanding the Civil Partnership Act to include any couple who wishes to enter into one (read our Lancaster Solicitors’ blog here). Our Lancaster Solicitors explained that this would benefit co-habiting couples who do not wish to marry, as they could enter into a Civil Partnership and gain the same rights as a married couple, for example, our Lancaster Solicitors explained, they would be entitled to certain benefits on the death of their partner that they would not usually be entitled to. 

Many parents of minors who suffer from a lack of mental capacity often forget that the automatic rights given to them by way of Parental Rights protections, including all financial and medical decisions, are diminished somewhat when their child reaches adulthood, often leading to a minefield of confusion, worry, and lack of knowing where to turn. 

At the end of June, our Lancaster solicitors team wrote about a Supreme Court Ruling relating to Civil Partnerships and Marriages, whereby a couple, Steinfeld and Keidan, wanted to enter into a Civil Partnership (read our blog, here). 

 

The final ruling made by the Justices was that the appellant’s rights under article 14 and article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights was breached by the continuing legality of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 following the introduction of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013.