Resolving Alimony Matters Locally

Resolving Alimony Matters Locally

Local Courthouse

Mediation and Collaborative Law Approaches


When it comes to resolving alimony matters locally, mediation and collaborative law approaches have emerged as effective alternatives to traditional litigation. These methods, which focus on cooperation rather than confrontation, offer a more peaceful and, often, a quicker resolution to financial disputes post-divorce.


Mediation is a process where a neutral third party (the mediator) assists both parties in reaching a mutual agreement. Unlike a court setting, mediation allows individuals to openly discuss their financial needs and concerns. Family Law Attorney Near Me . Its not uncommon for people to feel more comfortable (and even more in control) during mediation sessions. The mediator doesn't make decisions but helps facilitate communication and negotiations. In this way, the parties involved can create a settlement that works best for them, without the rigidity of a court order.


On the other hand, collaborative law involves each party hiring a specially trained lawyer whose role is to help negotiate an agreement. It's crucial to note that if the process fails and the case goes to court, the collaborative attorneys must withdraw. This rule ensures everyone has a vested interest in finding a solution without resorting to litigation. The collaborative process often includes other professionals, like financial planners or therapists, to address all aspects of the divorce (not just alimony), making it a comprehensive approach.


Now, some might think these methods are just for the agreeable ex-couples, but that's not true. Even those with significant differences can benefit from mediation and collaborative law. The aim is to reduce hostility, which is a common stumbling block in traditional divorce proceedings. Family Law Office Plus, these approaches can be less costly! Who doesn't want to save a little money during such an expensive life change?


However, it's important to acknowledge that mediation and collaborative law aren't for everyone. They require a level of cooperation and communication that can be difficult to achieve in highly contentious situations. If one party is unwilling to participate genuinely, these methods might not be successful. But for those who can engage in the process, the benefits are clear: less stress, more privacy, and solutions tailored to their specific circumstances.


In conclusion, while mediation and collaborative law might not replace litigation entirely, they certainly offer appealing alternatives for resolving alimony matters locally. By focusing on collaboration rather than conflict, these methods provide a path to resolution that can preserve relationships and foster a more positive post-divorce future.

Litigation in Family Courts


Alimony matters can be quite a tricky subject when it comes to litigation in family courts. Its not just about money (although thats a big part), but also about fairness and ensuring that both parties can move forward with their lives. Resolving these issues locally can often be the best approach for everyone involved.


Firstly, when we talk about alimony, were really discussing the financial support one spouse might need after a divorce. Its not something thats always given, but when it is, the aim is to help the lower-earning spouse maintain a similar standard of living. However, its never just a simple calculation. The courts have to consider a whole range of factors, from the length of the marriage to each individuals earning capacity. Oh, and lets not forget about any children involved!


One key advantage of handling alimony disputes locally is that it allows the parties to have more control over the outcome. Instead of having a judge (who might not fully understand the nuances of their lives) make all the decisions, the couple can negotiate terms that suit their unique situation. Isnt that more sensible? Plus, local resolutions tend to be faster and less costly than drawn-out court battles.


But, lets face it, not everyones going to agree on everything. Thats where mediation can come in handy. Mediation allows for a neutral third party to facilitate discussions, helping both sides find common ground. Its not about winning or losing; its about finding a solution that works for both parties. And often, mediators are well-versed with local laws and customs, which can be a real game-changer!


Its important to note though, that while resolving alimony matters locally has its benefits, it doesnt always mean a perfect resolution. Emotions can run high in these cases, and sometimes, despite best efforts, things might not work out as planned. But thats okay! Its important to remember that the aim is to reach a fair resolution, not a perfect one.


In conclusion, while alimony litigation in family courts can be challenging, resolving such matters locally offers a more personalized and often less stressful approach. By keeping things local, both parties stand a better chance at reaching an agreement that respects their individual needs and circumstances. And isnt that what we all want at the end of the day?

Modifying Alimony Agreements


Modifying alimony agreements can be quite a task, especially when youre trying to resolve these matters locally. Alimony, often called spousal support, is not set in stone and can indeed be modified. But, lets face it, its not a walk in the park! When one thinks about changing an alimony agreement, it might not be as straightforward as it seems.


One of the most common reasons people seek to modify an alimony agreement is due to a significant change in circumstances. Perhaps the person paying alimony has lost their job or the recipient has remarried. Its crucial to remember that not every change in life justifies a modification. Courts will typically look for substantial changes in financial situations before considering any amendments.

Local Courthouse

  • Local Family Law Firm
  • Domestic Relations Attorney
  • Family Court
You cant just wake up one day and decide, I dont want to pay this anymore. It doesnt work that way!


Oh, and lets not forget the local laws and regulations. These can vary significantly from one place to another. If youre attempting to modify an agreement, youll need to (unfortunately) navigate through these local legal waters. In some areas, the process might require mediation or even a court hearing. Its rarely a simple paper-pushing procedure. Youd better be ready to present a solid case for why the modification is necessary.


Its also important to communicate openly with your ex-spouse. In some cases, you might even reach a mutual agreement without having to go through the court. This can save a lot of time and, oh boy, a lot of stress. However, any verbal agreement should be documented properly to prevent future disputes. Believe it or not, people do forget or deny what was agreed upon when there's no official record.


Some might think that hiring an attorney is not necessary, but having professional legal advice can be incredibly beneficial. Local Courthouse They can guide you through the complexities of the law and help ensure that your rights are protected. Without proper guidance, you might find yourself entangled in a legal mess you didn't anticipate.


In conclusion, modifying alimony agreements locally involves understanding the local legal framework, communicating effectively with all parties involved, and sometimes seeking professional help. It's not something you should take lightly, as it can have long-lasting financial and emotional impacts. So, if youre thinking about making a change, be prepared to put in the effort and do it right!

Legal Resources and Support Services


Navigating the murky waters of alimony can be daunting, especially when youre trying to resolve matters locally. Luckily, there are numerous legal resources and support services available to help guide individuals through this complex process. Lets dive into the ways you can effectively address alimony issues without feeling completely overwhelmed.


First off, its important to understand that not all legal resources are created equal. Some may offer free consultations, while others might charge a fee-so you shouldnt assume everything will be cost-free! Its essential to do your homework and find services that are reputable and genuinely committed to helping you resolve your alimony concerns. More often than not, local legal aid societies can be a godsend for those who are financially strapped but still require solid legal advice. These organizations often provide valuable information and assistance to those who might otherwise be unable to afford it.


Additionally, many communities have family law clinics (theyre sometimes held at community centers or libraries) where you can get some initial guidance. These clinics often have volunteer attorneys who can answer basic questions and help you understand your rights and obligations under local law. Theyre not gonna do everything for you, but they can definitely point you in the right direction.


Online resources shouldnt be overlooked either. While the internet is brimming with information, not all of it is reliable. Be cautious and stick to reputable sites, like those run by established legal organizations or local government offices. They often offer downloadable forms, brochures, and guides that can be extremely helpful. However, remember that these resources are not a substitute for professional legal advice.


Dont forget to lean on support groups too! Sometimes, simply talking to others who have gone through similar experiences can provide clarity and emotional support. These groups can offer practical advice and share personal stories that can make the whole ordeal feel a tad less lonely. They might not have all the answers, but they can certainly provide comfort and encouragement.


In conclusion, resolving alimony matters locally is not something you have to face alone. Theres a wealth of resources and support services at your disposal, if youre willing to seek them out. By utilizing these, you can make the process more manageable and less intimidating. Just remember, its perfectly okay to ask for help and take advantage of the communitys offerings, because nobody should have to go through this alone.

Family Law Attorney Near Me

 

Family Law Act 1975
Parliament of Australia
  • An Act relating to Marriage and to Divorce and Matrimonial Causes and, in relation thereto and otherwise, Parental Responsibility for Children, and to financial matters arising out of the breakdown of de facto relationships and to certain other Matters ~ (amended); An Act relating to Marriage and to Divorce and Matrimonial Causes and, in relation thereto, Parental Rights and the Custody and Guardianship of Infants, and certain other Matters. ~ (original)
Citation No. 53, 1975 as amended or No. 53 of 1975
Territorial extent States and territories of Australia
Enacted by Australian House of Representatives
Royal assent 12 June 1975
Commenced 5 January 1976
Legislative history
Bill title Family Law Bill 1975
Introduced by Senator Lionel Murphy
Second reading 29 October 1974
Status: Current legislation

The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia. It has 15 parts and is the primary piece of legislation dealing with divorce, parenting arrangements between separated parents (whether married or not), property separation, and financial maintenance involving children or divorced or separated de facto partners: in Australia. It also covers family violence. It came into effect on 5 January 1976, repealing the Matrimonial Causes Act 1961, which had been largely based on fault.[1] On the first day of its enactment, 200 applications for divorce were filed in the Melbourne registry office of the Family Court of Australia, and 80 were filed in Adelaide, while only 32 were filed in Sydney.[2]

Background

[edit]

Though the Commonwealth had the power since federation in 1901 to make laws affecting divorce and related matters such as custody and maintenance, it did not enact such national uniform laws until 1961, when the Matrimonial Causes Act 1959[3] came into operation. The Act continued the fault-based system operating under state authority. Under the Commonwealth law a spouse had to establish one of the 14 grounds for divorce set out in the Act, including adultery, desertion, cruelty, habitual drunkenness, imprisonment and insanity.[4] In reality, the system was very expensive and humiliating for the spouses, necessitating appointment of barristers, often private detectives, collection of evidence, obtaining witness statements, photographs and hotel receipts, etc. Failure to prove a spouse's guilt or wrongdoing would result in a judge refusing to grant a divorce.[5] The Matrimonial Causes Act 1959 was replaced by no-fault divorce system of the Family Law Act 1975.

The Act was first introduced as a Bill on 13 December 1973. Before the Bill became law, it lapsed and was reintroduced on 3 April 1974 with substantial changes. A third reintroduction was made after the Bill lapsed a second time, with the final reintroduction made on 1 August 1974 with additional changes. The Act was contentions due to its reform of divorce laws. The legislation meant divorce could be obtained with one requisite being 12 months separation. A Gallup Poll taken during negotiation of the Bill showed 64% of men and 62% of women respectively supporting these changes.[6]

The Act

[edit]

The Act was enacted in 1975 by the Australian government, led by then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. One of the main innovations was the introduction of no-fault divorce. Couples no longer needed to show grounds for divorce, but instead, just that their relationship had suffered an irreconcilable breakdown.

Due to the division of power between the Commonwealth and the Australian states under the Australian Constitution, the Act initially could deal with children born or adopted only within a marriage, it was not until later years that the Act dealt with matters relating to ex-nuptial children. However, the states referred these powers to the Commonwealth and, until the 2006 amendments to the law, were all located under Chapter VII of the Act. For limitations on recognition of de facto couples inside and outside of Australia see Section 51(xxxvii) of the Constitution of Australia.

Divorce

[edit]

For Australian Divorce Law, see Australian family law

The Act revolutionised the divorce law of Australia by replacing the previous fault grounds with the single ground of irretrievable breakdown, established by separation and living apart for a period of twelve months. It also reduced the time for a decree nisi for a divorce to take effect from three months to one month.

Amendments in 2004 abolished the provisions dealing with "decrees nisi" or "decrees absolute" and changed the term dissolution of marriage to divorce. The twelve-month separation requirements remained and the one-month waiting period for a divorce order to take effect remained.

Parenting matters

[edit]

Best interests of the child

[edit]

The Act focuses on the rights of children, rather than the rights of parents. The Act requires courts to have regard to the 'need to protect the rights of children and promote their welfare' in any matter under the legislation.[7]

Parenting orders

[edit]

Part VII of the Act deals with the custody and welfare of children in Australia, regardless of the relationship between the parents. The Part has been amended significantly in 1995, 2006, and 2011.

Children's matters are determined on the basis of who the child will 'live with' and 'spend time with' (terms which were formerly labelled 'residence' and 'contact' respectively). Although the term custody often refers to where children live, the concept was abolished in 1995 with the Family Law Reform Act. The concept of custody gave much wider decision making powers to the parent with whom children lived, than either the concept of 'residence' or 'live with'. Since 1995 both parents legally have the same (but not shared) parental responsibility for children, regardless of where and with whom the children live, until and unless a court makes a different order.[8]

Parental responsibility is the ability to make decisions that affect the day-to-day and long-term care and welfare of the child, and can include things such as what school they attend and what their name is.

The Act does not specify that the person with whom the child is to reside or spend time with must necessarily be their natural parent, and provision is made for anyone 'concerned with the care, welfare or development of the child' to apply to the Court for orders.[9] In all proceedings, the paramount consideration is the 'best interests of the child', and the Court will not make an order that is contrary to these interests.[10][11]

If there is a dispute about parenting matters and the case is placed before a court, then the Court must apply a presumption that it is in the best interests of children that their parents have equal shared parental responsibility for the children.[12] In practical terms this means that parents must consult one another about major decisions affecting the care of children (but not day-to-day decisions), whereas without that order parents can make decisions together or without consulting each other. The presumption does not apply in circumstances of family violence or there has been any abuse (including sexual abuse) of a child, a parent or any family member living with the child.

There is no presumption of equal time with the child, however, if the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility has not been rebutted, the Court must consider whether it is in the best interests of the child and whether it is reasonably practicable.[13] If the decision is made to not allocate equal time in such circumstances, then the Court is required to consider allocating 'substantial and significant' time instead.[14]

Substantial and significant time includes weekends, weekdays, special days and holidays, and in practical terms usually means more than every second weekend.

The basis on which who the child lives with and spends time with (and how much time is spent) is determined firstly with reference to the best interests principle.[10] What is in the child's 'best interests' is determined with reference to the primary and secondary considerations found under s.60CC,[15] and it is by reference to these factors that argument proceeds in the Federal Circuit Court and the Family Court of Australia. Full custody (a 'live with' order) will usually be awarded to the parent who is better able to demonstrate that they can meet the child's best interests.

Property orders

[edit]

Part VIII of the Act deals with the distribution of property after a marriage breakdown, and the Court has broad power under section 79 to order property settlement between parties based on a number of factors regarding 'contribution' and 'future needs'.

Because of the limitation of Commonwealth power, until 1 March 2009 the Family Court could adjudicate on a property dispute if it arose out of only a matrimonial relationship. In 2009 the states agreed to refer power to the Commonwealth to include breakup of de facto relationships (including same sex relationships) which was accepted. The changes, passed by the Labor Rudd Government, came into effect on 1 March 2009. Prior to this de facto and same-sex couples did not have the same property rights as married couples under the Act, and so had to rely on their state's de facto relationship legislation. Such claims were often much harder to prove than under the Act, and did not include all the same considerations as under the Act, and could result in a more uneven or diminished distribution of property than would otherwise be possible.

It is necessary to bring a property claim before or within 12 months of the divorce occurring or two years of separation for de facto couples,[16] although unlike property proceedings in various other countries, the two usually occur separately.

A standard s.79 property adjustment,[17] has 4 steps:

1. Identify the marital assets and ascribe a value to them
The assets which may be distributed under the Act include the totality of the parties' joint and several assets. The amount of property is determined at the date of hearing rather than at the date of divorce, so this can also include property acquired after separation. Superannuation is also a marital asset under s.90MC, but will not be available for distribution until it 'vests'
2. Look at each party's contributions to the marriage under s.79(4)
This section of the Act contains a list of factors by which the Court can determine who contributed what to the marriage. Broadly, the contributions can be taken as financial in nature (for example, paying off a mortgage) or non-financial in nature (for example, taking care of the children). The party which can demonstrate a larger contribution to the marital relationship will receive a larger proportion of the assets.
3. Look at each party's financial resources and future needs under s.75(2) and adjust accordingly
4 The court then considers whether the proposed distribution is just and equitable
After the parties' contributions have been established, a final adjustment is made according to their individual future needs. These needs can include factors such as an inability to gain employment, the continued care of a child under 18 years of age, and medical expenses. This is often used to account for a party which has not shown a great deal of substantive contributions, but will require money to live on as a result of factors largely outside of its control.

More complex questions arise when a party has incurred losses,[18][19] or when assets are held by trusts.[20]

Other provisions

[edit]

Section 120 of the Act abolished the actions for criminal conversation, damages for adultery and enticement of a party to a marriage, but it did not change the law relating to breach of promise. The action for breach of promise has been abolished in South Australia.[21]

The Courts

[edit]

Creation of courts

[edit]

The Act created the Family Court of Australia, with equal status to the Federal Court of Australia, as a court of record and with both original and appellate jurisdiction. Appeals from the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia (the appellate jurisdiction) are to the High Court of Australia.

In 2000, in a somewhat controversial move, the Australian government created the Federal Circuit Court of Australia as a second court to handle matters under the Act. Appeals from the Federal Circuit Court are to the Family Court of Australia,[22] but its decisions are not considered inferior to the Family Court.

Western Australia has continued to refer its family law matters to the Family Court of Western Australia by virtue of the Family Court Act 1997 (WA).

Powers of the court

[edit]

The Act gives the Court powers to make orders to restrain domestic violence, dispose of matrimonial property (including resources such as superannuation), parental responsibility, the living arrangements of children, and financial maintenance for former spouses or children.

The Court retains its ability to hand down punitive sanctions in a number of areas where parties do not comply with Court orders. In the most extreme cases, as confirmed by the 2006 Amendments, this can include sentences of imprisonment (up to 12 months), fines, work orders, bonds, and the like. In most cases, however, the most effective method of penalizing a person is to award legal costs against them. In fact, the 2006 Amendments encourage this to be used as a sanction where people make improper or false allegations about someone else before the Court.

Same-sex marriages

[edit]

The Act recognises the need to preserve and protect the institution of marriage as the union between 2 persons, to the exclusion of all others voluntarily entered into for life.[23]

The Federal Circuit Court of Australia holds jurisdiction to handle the dissolution of same sex marriages (i.e. divorces) through Part VI of the Act.[24]

Other relationships

[edit]

Polygamous marriages are generally not permitted in Australia. The relevant law prohibits those who are married from proceeding with a second marriage.[25] However, the Act does permit multiple de facto relationships, and also recognises polygamous marriages may be lawfully entered into in countries other than Australia and grants rights under the Act to participants of these polygamous marriages.[26]

De facto couples are also provided for under the Act.[27]

Other provisions

[edit]

The default position in family law proceedings is that each party pays his or her own costs. The Act also abolished prison as a penalty for maintenance defaulters and imprisoned those held in contempt of the court.

Amendments

[edit]

The Act has clearly, over time, been one of the most controversial pieces of Australian legislation and has been subject to numerous changes and amendments since its enactment. A number of amendments have reflected the political climate of the times: centre-left Australian governments, such as those led by the Australian Labor Party, strengthened the relevancy of non-financial contribution of the stay-at-home mother in property matters; centre-right governments, such as those led by the Liberal Party of Australia, have furthered the wishes of fathers' groups by extending the rights and responsibilities in negotiating parenting arrangements. The 2006 amendments changed the way matters involving children are dealt with. These included:

  • a progression towards compulsory mediation (before Court proceedings can be filed, in an effort to ensure matters do not reach litigation),
  • greater examination of issues involving family violence, child abuse or neglect,
  • more importance being placed on a child's family and social connections, and
  • a presumption that parents have equal parental responsibility - NOT equal parenting time.
  • encouraging both parents to remain meaningfully involved in their children's lives following separation, provided there is no risk of violence or abuse.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "New divorce laws to start today— No-Fault Ground", Sydney Morning Herald, January 5, 1976, p. 2
  2. ^ "New divorce law offices besieged by callers", by Jill Sykes, Sydney Morning Herald, January 6, 1976, p. 2
  3. ^ "Matrimonial Causes Act 1959". 16 December 1959.
  4. ^ The Matrimonial Causes Act 1959
  5. ^ https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/family_law_and_marriage_breakdown_in_australia.pdf [bare URL PDF]
  6. ^ Enderby, Kep (1975). "The Family Law Act: Background to the Legislation" (PDF). UNSW Law Journal.
  7. ^ Family Law Act 1975 s 43.
  8. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 61C Each parent has parental responsibility (subject to court orders).
  9. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 65C Who may apply for a parenting order.
  10. ^ a b Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 60CA Child's best interests paramount consideration in making a parenting order.
  11. ^ Gronow v Gronow [1979] HCA 63, (1979) 144 CLR 513 (14 December 1979).
  12. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 61DA Presumption of equal shared parental responsibility when making parenting orders.
  13. ^ MRR v GR [2010] HCA 4, (2010) 240 CLR 461 Judgment Summary [2010] HCASum 4 High Court (3 March 2010).
  14. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 65DAA Court to consider child spending equal time or substantial and significant time with each parent in certain circumstances.
  15. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 60CC How a court determines what is in a child's best interests.
  16. ^ "Property settlement". Australian Family Lawyers. Retrieved 10 September 2025.
  17. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79 Alteration of property interests.
  18. ^ Kowaliw v Kowaliw [1981] FamCA 70, (1981) FLC 91-092 (21 September 1981)
  19. ^ Ryan, Judy (2006). "Enlarging the Asset Pool - Adding Back Notional Assets". Federal Judicial Scholarship." [2006] Federal Judicial Scholarship 1.
  20. ^ Kennon v Spry [2008] HCA 56, (2008) 238 CLR 366 Judgment summary (PDF), High Court of Australia
  21. ^ "The Law Relating to Breach of Promise of Marriage".
  22. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 94AAA Appeals to Family Court from Federal Circuit Court and Magistrates Court of Western Australia.
  23. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 43 Principles to be applied by courts.
  24. ^ "Same Sex Relationships | Stone Group". Stone Group. Retrieved 19 January 2018.
  25. ^ Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) s 94.
  26. ^ Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 6 Polygamous marriages.
  27. ^ "De facto Relationships - Family Court of Australia". www.familycourt.gov.au. Retrieved 16 September 2017.
[edit]

Family law (also called matrimonial law or the law of domestic relations) is an area of the law that deals with family matters and domestic relations.[1]

Overview

[edit]

Subjects that commonly fall under a nation's body of family law include:

This list is not exhaustive and varies depending on jurisdiction.

Conflict of laws

[edit]

Issues may arise in family law where there is a question as to the laws of the jurisdiction that apply to the marriage relationship or to custody and divorce, and whether a divorce or child custody order is recognized under the laws of another jurisdiction.[8][9][10][11] For child custody, many nations have joined the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction in order to grant recognition to other member states' custody orders and avoid issues of parental kidnapping.[12]

By jurisdiction

[edit]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Atkinson, Jeff. "ABA Family Legal Guide" (PDF). American Bar Association. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 November 2017. Retrieved 31 October 2017.
  2. ^ Weitzman, Lenore J. (1980). "The Economics of Divorce: Social and Economic Consequences of Property, Alimony and Child Support Awards". UCLA Law Review. 28: 1181. Retrieved 9 October 2019.
  3. ^ Wadlington, Walter (1980–1981). "Adoption of Adults a Family Law Anomaly". Cornell Law Review. 54: 566. Retrieved 9 October 2019.
  4. ^ Capron, A.M.; Radin, M.J. (1988). "Choosing Family Law over Contract Law as a Paradigm for Surrogate Motherhood". Law, Medicine & Health Care. 16 (1–2): 34–43. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.1988.tb01048.x. PMID 3060684. S2CID 20125279.
  5. ^ Lawrie, Moloney; Smyth, Bruce M.; Weston, Ruth; Richardson, Nich; Qu, Lixia; Gray, Matthew (2007). "Allegations of family violence and child abuse in family law children's proceedings: key findings of Australian Institute of Family Studies Research Report No. 15". Family Matters. 77. Retrieved 9 October 2019.
  6. ^ Babb, Barbara A. (1998). "Fashioning an interdisciplinary framework for court reform in family law: A blueprint to construct a unified family court". Southern California Law Review. 71: 469. Retrieved 9 October 2019.
  7. ^ Lee, Chang Ling (1975). "Current Status of Paternity Testing". Family Law Quarterly. 9 (4): 615–633. JSTOR 25739134.
  8. ^ Currie, David P. (1966). "Suitcase Divorce in the Conflict of Laws: Simons, Rosenstiel, and Borax". The University of Chicago Law Review. 34 (1): 26–77. doi:10.2307/1598624. JSTOR 1598624.
  9. ^ "Family law | Definition, Examples, Types, & Facts | Britannica". www.britannica.com. 2024-05-23. Retrieved 2024-05-29.
  10. ^ "legal practice areas Family Law. The University of Law".
  11. ^ Ahmady, Kameel Et al 2017: Echo of Silence (book) (A Comprehensive Research Study on Early Child Marriage (ECM) in Iran). Nova publishing, USA. p 10.
  12. ^ "International Parental Kidnapping". U.S. Department of Justice. 3 June 2015. Retrieved 9 October 2019.

Further reading

[edit]
  • David Bradley. ‘Family law’, in Elgar encyclopedia of comparative law, 3rd edn. Vol. 2: E-L. Eds. Jan M. Smits et al. Cheltenham/Northampton, M.A.: Edward Elgar, 2023.
  • Elizabeth Brake & Lucinda Ferguson, eds. Philosophical foundations of children's and family law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
  • Aleck Chloros, Max Rheinstein, & Mary Ann Glendon, eds. International encyclopedia of comparative law, vol. 4: Persons and family. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007.
  • Shazia Choudhry & Jonathan Herring, eds. The Cambridge companion to comparative family law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019.
  • John Eekelaar. Family law and personal life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
  • Finer, Sir Morris (1974). Report of the Committee on One-Parent Families: presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Social Services by command of Her Majesty July 1974. H.M.S.O. ISBN 9780101562911.
  • Marsha Garrison. Family life, family law, and family justice: tying the knot. Abingdon: Routledge, 2023.
  • Laurence D. Houlgate. Philosophy, law and the family: a new introduction to the philosophy of law. Cham: Springer, 2017.
  • Shamil Jeppie, Ebrahim Moosa, & Richard L. Roberts, eds. Muslim family law in Sub-Saharan Africa: colonial legacies and post-colonial challenges. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2010.
  • Klaw, Margaret (2013). Keeping It Civil: The Case of the Pre-nup and the Porsche & Other True Accounts from the Files of a Family Lawyer. Algonquin Books. ISBN 978-1616202392.
  • Harry D. Krause. ‘Comparative family law’, in Oxford handbook of comparative law. Eds. Mathias Reimann & Reinhard Zimmermann. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, p. 1099–1130.
  • Ziba Mir-Hosseini et al., eds. Gender and equality in Muslim family law: justice and ethics in the Islamic legal tradition. London: I.B. Tauris, 2017.
  • Jens M. Scherpe, ed. European family law. 3 vols. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2016.
[edit]