scholarly journals Haley v Haley: Family law arbitration and the new frontier of private ordering

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Heenan
1991 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Trebilcock ◽  
Rosemin Keshvani

2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-201
Author(s):  
Sharon Thompson

This article examines the effect of and connection between stereotypes about wives and myths about financial provision on divorce. It is based on an assessment of press reports on Mills v Mills which have fuelled calls for reform of the law of financial provision on divorce, most notably the Divorce (Financial Provision) Bill 2017–2019. It argues that gendered stereotypes about wives (such as ‘alimony drone’, ‘gold-digger’ and ‘meal ticket for life’) inhibit shifts towards substantive equality for women. These gendered stereotypes have not only framed the debate, creating a non-existent problem for reform proposals to solve, but have also affected the way in which individuals form family law agreements, which is important given the current policy emphasis on private ordering. The article concludes by proposing that reflexive engagement with stereotypes about wives should be an important part of judicial reasoning.


Author(s):  
Sonia Harris-Short ◽  
Joanna Miles ◽  
Rob George

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter begins with an overview of families and family law in England and Wales today. It then discusses themes and issues in contemporary family law, covering rules versus discretion; women’s and men’s perspectives on family law; sex and gender identity; sexual orientation; cultural diversity; and state intervention versus private ordering, including the role of the family court and of non-court dispute resolution in family cases.


2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Audrey Macklin

AbstractThe debate surrounding judicial recognition of faith-based arbitration is typically framed as a multicultural contest between the liberal, gender-equal neutrality of public law and the patriarchal particularity of religious law. Within this framework, the state is understood as advancing the goal of protecting the ‘encultured subject’ from the disempowering effects of her religion. The author departs from this trend by reading the Canadian controversy over Islamic family law arbitration against a legal landscape that already authorises and encourages parties to settle matters of property division and support through private ordering. The author argues that faith-based arbitration and its normative driver, multiculturalism, were already nested within the domain of privatisation and neoliberal ideals of choice, liberty and autonomy. Facilitation of private ordering in family law paved the way for faith-based arbitration. Through a close reading of Supreme Court of Canada family law jurisprudence about the enforcement of marital contracts, the author argues that concerns more properly directed at privatisation per se have been aimed at the putative content of religious norms. The author offers a policy proposal that addresses these concerns as they arise in the context of faith-based arbitration.


2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-201
Author(s):  
Sharon Thompson

This article examines the effect of and connection between stereotypes about wives and myths about financial provision on divorce. It is based on an assessment of press reports on Mills v Mills which have fuelled calls for reform of the law of financial provision on divorce, most notably the Divorce (Financial Provision) Bill 2017–2019. It argues that gendered stereotypes about wives (such as ‘alimony drone’, ‘gold-digger’ and ‘meal ticket for life’) inhibit shifts towards substantive equality for women. These gendered stereotypes have not only framed the debate, creating a non-existent problem for reform proposals to solve, but have also affected the way in which individuals form family law agreements, which is important given the current policy emphasis on private ordering. The article concludes by proposing that reflexive engagement with stereotypes about wives should be an important part of judicial reasoning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document