Mishcon de Reya page structure
Site header
Main menu
Main content section
Abstract white structure with green glass

CA v DR (Schedule 1 Children Act 1989: Pension Claim) [2021] EWFC 21 – Schedule 1 award not extended to make pension provision for caring parent

Posted on 29 July 2021

The parties had a four-year old child, for whom the applicant made an application for financial provision under Schedule 1. The father's wealth was in the region of £190 million and he had an annual income of £3.8 million, although he only gave general disclosure, relying on the so-called "Millionaire's Defence" (i.e. that he had sufficient funds to meet any award the court might make). As part of her claim, the mother sought £40,000 a year to put towards a pension fund for herself. She argued that the court should revisit/update and/or restate the principles set out by the Court of Appeal in Re P [2003] EWCA Civ 837, where it had been held that a parent should not gain in their own right from a Schedule 1 application.

Roberts J did not accept that an order should be made in the terms sought by the mother. Re P was clear that the provision to be made was for the benefit of the child. Although a carer's allowance was appropriate, this was not intended to provide the caring parent with some form of compensation, or future nest-egg.

Melissa Lesson says:

'A further attempt by an unmarried mother, to seek financial provision for herself (this time in the form of £40,000 per annum pension provision) has been refused by the High Court, reinforcing and underscoring that Schedule 1 of the Children Act, is precisely that – for the children; beyond a 'carer's allowance', unmarried mothers cannot expect to receive the same level of financial provision as married mothers, regardless of the wealth of the father, which in this case was significant.'

How can we help you?
Help

How can we help you?

Subscribe: I'd like to keep in touch

If your enquiry is urgent please call +44 20 3321 7000

I'm a client

I'm looking for advice

Something else