The Report: The Case Study: “The Case of the Expectant Father”
1.0 Introduction
The solicitors firm provides legal guidance to recently visited client Charlie Singh, 35, for legal issues related to a divorce matter with 37-year-old Kasia. Charlie and Kasia have two children’s, Samuel (10 years old) and Sofia (8 years old). The separation was done 3 years ago however, Charlie can visit his children’s at the behest of his ex-wife Kasia. Based on the above scenarios, the next section discusses the key problems faced by client Charlie Sing and then analyses them. It provides legal guidance for Charlie related to the legal information.
2.0 Discussion analysis
An explanation of the legal issues arising
Charlie was a client of solicitor firms who separated from his wife Kasia but faced challenges to meet with their two children’s Samuel and Sofia due to the behest of his ex-wife Kasia. The separation between Kasia and Charlie was done 3 years ago. However, at that time, Charlie doesn't have any permanent residence[1]. Therefore, Charlie failed to keep his children’s Samuel and Sofia to him. Therefore, the main legal issues from the above scenario can be discussed as follows.
The key legal issues
Charlie faced challenges from custody issues of his two children’s. Charlie faced restrictions from his ex-wife Kasia to meet with his two children’s Samuel and Sofia. As the separation was done 3 years ago and Charlie doesn't have any residents to live in, the custody of the children’s received by his wife Kasia. At present Charlie has his new living partner Arati and Charlie lived at Aarati’s house for the last 12 months periods[2]. Charlie also had wonderful relationships with Samuel and Sofia but due to restrictions of his ex-wife, Kasia, Charlie cannot live with his children’s. Therefore, custody issues are one of the main legal issues. As evidence, Charlie also shares the children's dislike-like patterns, hobbies, schooling, etc.
The second legal conflict between Charlie and Kasi arises due to religious issues. Charlie belongs to the Sikh category and Kasia comes from a Catholic origin. Therefore, as per the previous settlement, both couples committed that the children’s would be brought up based on both the culture of Sikh and Catholic origin. However, Charlie started to live with his new partner Aarati, who comes from the Sikh religion. Charlie also mentioned that the children’s met with Aarati at previous for several times but did not have any negative effect on religious dominance. However, Kasia put strict restrictions on Arati from meeting with their children’s because Kasia believed that Aarati had a negative influence related to Sikh religious dominance on the children’s. Therefore, this is another legal issue for which Charlie has permission to meet with the children’s for a few hours at the weekend. Kasia put the excuses based on students' remaining homework.
The third legal issue was raised due to wrong, misleading information from a fake website fathersforequality.com. This website misleads Charlie that both the partners have equal rights to spend equal time with the children’s.
These are the main legal issues faced by Client Charlie.
An explanation of factual issues of note
The factual issues from the above scenario are mentioned as follows.
The custody issues of the children’s are the main issues from the above case history. Charlie is deprived of getting custody of his two children’s Samuel and Sofia, due to lack of residence. The next factorial issues arise due to religious controversy among the couples. Charlie belongs to the Sikh religion while Charlie’s ex-wife, Kasia comes from Catholic origin. Therefore, the couple decided to continue their education, views as a mixed religious pattern[4]. However, Charlie is involved in another new relationship with Aarati who belongs to the Sikh religion. Therefore, Kasia is afraid that if the childrens start to live with Charlie, then the children’s might be dominated by the Sikh religion. The third factual issue is misleading legal information regarding equal rights of the couples on the children’s after separation and divorce. Another factual issue of the above case is due to the secret of the pregnancy of Aar tee, which might also affect the result and amendment of the above-mentioned case.
Advice on the application regarding rational decisions
The first major misleading information is related to equal opportunity among the couples for the children’s even after the separation. Based on “Children Act 1989” describes the parental responsibility and custody of the couples after the separation. The “Child Protect Act” describes the protection, care, welfare, education, and maintenance for taking care of the custody of the children’s. The custody of the children’s often depends upon the financial positions, protection power and capacity of the couples[5]. However, Charlie doesn't have any own house instead Charlie lives in his new partner, Aarati's house. Therefore, Sameule and Sofia remain safe with their mother Kasia. Charlie can apply the “Domestic Violence, Crime, and Victim (DVAC) Act 2004” to get temporary custody of the children’s. Therefore, it is advised that Charlie proceeds with the right information regarding equal custody of the couple after separation. Because the website “fathersforequality.com” provides the misleading information[6]. It is also advised to disclose the future relationship planning with the new partner Aarati, because, Charlie said that Aarati is pregnant and going to married. The religious conflict is another major issue as both the couple come from two separate religions of Sikh and Catholic origin. It is also advised that Charlie can also move for a legal case and file a case against children’s custody.
3.0 Conclusion
The separation between the couples and the custody issues for the children’s are very common problems, which are discussed in the above section by following the case study of Charlie and Kasia. Charlie misleads about custody rights due to misleading, fake information from fake websites. The secret about the new relationship status also creates challenges for making the right decisions regarding custody. Therefore, the above section describes the general advice and guidance for the above case analysis.
Worried that cheap assignment help means low-quality work?
That’s a myth! Affordable Assignment Help Services are designed to provide high-quality academic assistance at prices students can afford. These services combine affordability with credibility, offering well-researched content, proper formatting, and dependable support, proving that you don’t need to pay more to get the best.
Reference list
Book
Parkinson, L., 2023. Conciliation in separation and divorce: Finding common ground. Taylor & Francis. Available at: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=s5a-EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1787&dq=custody+Act+after+separation+among+the+couples+in+UK&ots=GJe1l7V2C8&sig=VhF9tlj_NE1rBj3hn_WETy4rxdg [Accessed on: 14.01.24]
Kesselring, K.J. and Stretton, T., 2022. Marriage, Separation, and Divorce in England, 1500-1700. Oxford University Press. Available at: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=HJ1cEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=custody+Act+after+separation+among+the+couples+in+UK&ots=9Eih9NOtWj&sig=2UKVdy37fjYSSMSPho9GvMpKJ8g [Accessed on: 14.01.24]
Journals
Kami?ska, K. (2021) ‘Joint physical custody after divorce’, Roczniki Administracji i Prawa, 4(XXI), pp. 187–195. doi:10.5604/01.3001.0015.8310.
Spearman, K.J., Hardesty, J.L. and Campbell, J. (2022) ‘Post?Separation abuse: A concept analysis’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 79(4), pp. 1225–1246. doi:10.1111/jan.15310.
Siddiqi, F. (2022) ‘Visitation rights of grandparents involved in child custody litigation’, SSRN Electronic Journal [Preprint]. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4206333.
Miller, I. (2021) ‘Ending the “cult of the broken home”: Divorce, children and the changing emotional dynamics of separating British families, c. 1945–90’, Twentieth Century British History, 32(2), pp. 165–188. doi:10.1093/tcbh/hwab003.
[1] Parkinson, L., 2023. Conciliation in separation and divorce: Finding common ground. Taylor & Francis.
[2] Kesselring, K.J. and Stretton, T., 2022. Marriage, Separation, and Divorce in England, 1500-1700. Oxford University Press.
[3] Kami?ska, K. (2021) ‘Joint physical custody after divorce’, Roczniki Administracji i Prawa, 4(XXI), pp. 187–195. doi:10.5604/01.3001.0015.8310.
[4] Spearman, K.J., Hardesty, J.L. and Campbell, J. (2022) ‘Post?Separation abuse: A concept analysis’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 79(4), pp. 1225–1246. doi:10.1111/jan.15310.
[5] Siddiqi, F. (2022) ‘Visitation rights of grandparents involved in child custody litigation’, SSRN Electronic Journal [Preprint]. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4206333.
[6] Miller, I. (2021) ‘Ending the “cult of the broken home”: Divorce, children and the changing emotional dynamics of separating British families, c. 1945–90’, Twentieth Century British History, 32(2), pp. 165–188. doi:10.1093/tcbh/hwab003.
