Late last year, Vardags, a law firm focused on family law, held an essay competition for university students. Several of our students submitted pieces to the firm, addressing a contemporary concern related to family law in England and Wales. The quality of work submitted resulted in nine of our students making the shortlist. We look at each of their entries below.
By Grant Longstaff. Published 25 September 2024.
Vardags Family Law
Founded in 2005 by Ayesha Vardag, Vardags has become one of the leading firms for divorce and family litigation for high net worth (HNW) and ultra high net worth (UHNW) cases. In the years since, Vardags has continued to grow and now has five offices, over 100 members, and endures on The Lawyer’s “top 200 UK law firms” list. Vardags now also has private client, civil litigation and criminal defence departments.
Called “Britain’s top divorce lawyer” by The Telegraph, Ayesha Vardag herself has acted in many landmark cases. One of the most significant came in 2010 when Vardag made legal history in the Supreme Court, changing the perception of prenuptial agreements and helping give them decisive weight in English divorce law.
Vardags “seek to hire the brightest talent”, and with an opportunity for the five best essayists to interview for their Graduate Training Programme it’s no wonder many students contributed. Let’s look at our student’s entries below.
Pavlos Andreou – Legal Practice Course (LPC)
LPC student, Pavlos Andreou, chose to look at how section 20 of the Children Act 1989 is often misinterpreted by local authorities. Under section 20, local authorities must provide accommodation for any child in need, however Andreou argues the consent of parents or guardians is at times obtained improperly and incompatible with the welfare of the child.
“...not being adequately informed of their rights and the [local authorities] responsibilities, and unnecessary delays due to the [local authorities] reluctance, [is] violating [parents] rights and putting the children at risk, glossing over the black letter of the law.”
Reby Daniel – Solicitors Qualifying Examinations (SQE)
Reby Daniel shines the spotlight on the recent trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. Highlighting some of the challenges faced when it comes to such cases, including biased juries, the damage of rape myths, and the disclosure of counselling notes and sexual history of the victim in court, Daniel's argues for training juries for trials.
“Were a jury to be vetted and trained this would mean more confidence for victims coming forward with their cases, having the courtroom be a fairer place to be and less traumatic for victims.”
Eysha Gill – Bar Practice Course (BPC)
Eysha Gill took time from the BPC to discuss the nuances of parental alienation and its increasing presence in legal battles. Parental alienation refers to scenarios in which children are manipulated or coerced by one parent to disparage the other. There isn’t currently a legal definition for parental alienation however, meaning cases involving claims of this can be complicated to navigated and open to abuse.
“While parental alienation may in some cases be founded on legitimate concerns, the concept carries clear potential for illegitimate use by a parent, and the courts’ recent wariness of the term appears to highlight a growing realisation of this.”
Claire Johnson
Claire Johnson asks if the conduct of the parties involved – as a factor in section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act – should be removed as something which the court may have to regard. Section 25 outlines factors courts must consider when making financial orders in cases, and Johnson’s essay draws on numerous cases to make her argument.
“Currently, the statue language is inconsistent with case law and amending section 25 to require the court to only consider the conduct where it has severely financially impacted the parties, or there was litigation misconduct, would provide much needed clarity to this area of law.”
Manpreet Kaur – LPC
Manpreet Kaur’s essay examines the complex division of assets when the relationship of cohabitants breaks down. With the need for legal documentation declaring the interests of each party often overlooked, Kaur highlights how rulings based on financial contributions promote gender inequality.
“Given that men have higher employment rates than women, they are more likely to be able to contribute financially, which perpetuates gender disparity. The courts’ examination of cohabitant relationships has been criticised for reinforcing gender stereotypes and impeding equity within the context of childbearing due to its inadequate consideration of non-financial contributions.”
Chioma Vanessa Okanu – LLB Law
Law graduate Chioma Vanessa Okanu chose to focus on the need for global consistency when it comes to enforcing prenuptial agreements. Okanu’s essay discusses the difficulties of enforcing such agreements, particularly when a relationship spans different countries and, subsequently, different legal jurisdictions.
“…harmonisation raises concerns about countries conceding their norms, challenging notions of autonomy. Despite the intricate obstacles and details inherent in each country’s legal landscape, promoting global consistency in enforcing prenuptial agreements is imperative. Countries should commit to fairness, procedural predictability, and respect for individual autonomy, recognising the diversity of legal traditions and cultural norms.”
Marium Olusunmade - LPC
Marium Olusunmade’s essay asks whether the Divorce and Dissolution Act 2020 addresses the criticisms levelled at the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Until recently only one reason could be given for the breakdown of a marriage: The irretrievable breakdown of the relationship. However, one of the most significant changes means there is now no longer a requirement to provide an explanation for a marriage breaking down. Olusunmade’s essay highlights how new laws have helped improve family law.
“Removal of blame…promotes a cooperative family life, with less of a burden on children having to relive their parent’s marriage failure in court. Removal of the ability to contest divorces has also positively considered those in domestic abusive relationships, who can now leave those marriages with more support from the law.”
Helen Ross – BPC
Helen Ross analyses the weaknesses of the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) identified in the Harm Report 2020. CAFCASS represent and focus on the welfare of children and young people involved in family court cases throughout England. The Harm Report assessed the risk of children and their parents in private law children proceedings. In summary, Ross concluded:
“…the Harm Report of 2020 contains elaborate provisions concerning the weaknesses inherent in the Cafcass system and provides viable recommendations for adoption to tackle the highlighted culture of failure of Cafcass to realise the intended objectives for establishing the agency.”
Eilidh Rowan – BPC
Eilidh Rowan’s essay looks at the barriers faced by individuals unable to afford legal representation. Rowan explores the difficulties faced by many in accessing legal aid for mediation, asks if mediation is an appropriate route to resolution, and concludes a lack of access to legal aid can result in inequality and disadvantage women.
“…although professional support is available via mediation under [the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012] LASPO, the removal of legally aided lawyers from the process has left mediation inaccessible and inappropriate for many people. Where individuals cannot engage with mediation, they can be compelled to act without professional support…”
If you’re interested in a career in family law, our postgraduate LLM in Family Law is the perfect starting point.
