Esther Lieu analyses I County Council v TD & Others [2017] EWHC 379 (Fam) for Family Law Week and considers of the difference between care orders and supervision orders.
Esther Lieu
Year of Call: 2011
Email Address: [email protected]
CJSM: [email protected]
Telephone: 0117 928 1520
Clerk Details
- Clerk Name: Robert Leonard
- Clerk Telephone: 0330 332 0773
- Clerk Email: [email protected]
Family
Esther Lieu is a specialist family lawyer with an emphasis on private family law matters and cases involving financial provision following divorce or dissolution of marriages and separation of unmarried couples.
Finance
Esther has a busy practice in financial remedies (from pre-nuptial and separation agreements through to contested final hearings, appeals and enforcement), including applications brought under ToLATA and Schedule 1. She is a forceful negotiator at an FDR and balances the costs of further of litigation against the overarching aim of achieving the best outcome for her client. In particular she has experience of the following:
- Applications brought under ToLATA including equitable accounting claims
- Maintenance applications (brought under MCA 1973, Schedule 1 CA 1989)
- Interveners and third-party interests
- Non-matrimonial property
- Conduct cases
- Variation and enforcement applications
- Applications for financial relief following overseas divorce (MFPA 1984)
- Applications for injunctive relief
- Appeals
Notable cases
H v H (2023 – 2024)
Acted for W in a contested final hearing in which the parties continued to cohabit for 12 years post Decree Absolute. Successfully obtained findings that a Separation Agreement was not binding and three properties in H’s sole name were matrimonial property. Costs awarded.
Acted for W in successfully defending an application for permission to appeal: permission refused on all Grounds, costs awarded.
Acted for W in enforcement application, costs awarded.
R-R v M v L (2023)
Acted for Intervenor responding to a s.37 MCA1973 application made by W in FR proceedings in respect of two dispositions of shares made to the Intervenor. Successfully persuaded the W at FDR to withdraw her application and Intervenor was discharged.
F v F (2023)
Acted for W in case where capital was limited (and held 95% in H name) but H income significant but complicated as employed overseas. Despite children being over 18 and no special circumstances arising, settlement agreed whereby W retained FMH for a further 4 years and received 75% NPS upon sale, plus generous child maintenance for 4 years and spousal maintenance for 8 years.
K v W (2022)
Acted for Claimant in TLATA application in respect of the family home: property was held as Tenants in Common without a Declaration of Trust. Successfully settled at FDR on basis that interest held in equal shares (Defendant initially asserted he held 100% of the interest).
C v C (2022)
Acted for H where there was minimal capital but over £1,000,000 in pension provision. Indication at FDR rejected W’s contention that she should be compensated for delayed receipt and her claim for maintenance and favourable settlement achieved.
M v M (2019)
Acted for W where charging orders had been made in respect of the family home and properties owned by the parties (under a company structure) in favour of the husband’s former employer from whom he had embezzled funds. The wife had sole care of the parties’ two children, and the husband had declared himself bankrupt.
B v A (2019)
Represented the father in an application brought under Schedule 1 CA1989 by the mother for child maintenance to extend beyond the child’s 18th birthday on account of special circumstances.. Both applications were successfully opposed following detailed analysis of the Child Support Act 1991.
P v P (2017)
Acted for the Russian wife in protracted proceedings which included successfully obtaining permission to apply for financial relief following an overseas divorce in the Royal Courts of Justice, obtaining injunctive relief against the husband’s attempt to dissipate assets, countering the husband’s father’s claim to a third party interest in the property and achieving a very positive outcome at final hearing.
Private law
Esther is regularly instructed in applications for child arrangements orders, specific issue and prohibited steps orders, as well as injunctions, enforcement applications, fact-finding hearings and contested final hearings. In particular, she has experience in cases involving:
- Alienating behaviours (and transfer of residence)
- Domestic Abuse (to include coercive and controlling behaviour)
- Drug and substance abuse
- Mental health issues (to personality disorders, fabricated or induced illness (FII) etc.)
- Disputed jurisdiction (within the U.K. and international)
- Internal and international relocation
Notable cases:
Y v Y (2024)
Acted for mother in a three-day FFH. Findings made included findings of physical assault by the father of the mother and the children. The father’s allegation of parental alienation by the mother was not made out.
A v B v E (2024)
Acted for mother in private law proceedings in circumstances where she had been found (in public law proceedings) to have caused injuries to a non-party child, and her own children removed. Contact with her own children had since resumed and she now opposed the father’s application for lives with orders.
E v E (2023)
Successfully acted for maternal grandparents in their application for Non-Molestation Orders against their son in law, and a Child Arrangements Order (lives with) in respect of their grand-daughter.
H v H (2022)
Acted for M in 3 day FFH where findings made (on the mother’s allegations) that the father had: physically assaulted the mother (non-fatal strangulation), made false allegations to the nursery to undermine the mother, caused the children emotional harm and neglected the children’s needs whilst under the influence of alcohol.
W v W (2019)
Represented the father during a 3 day fact-find within a long-running application for child arrangements orders, and successfully defended him in committal proceedings brought by the mother.
B v B (2019)
Acted for the father in successfully opposing the mother’s application to relocate with the parties’ children who lived with her.
S v S (2019)
Acted for the father following the unlawful removal of his children by the mother to Scotland. Successfully obtained an interim order that the children be returned to England and successfully argued (against the mother) that England retained jurisdiction to hear the matter. The children were returned to the father’s care and he was ultimately granted a live with order in respect of both.
E v E (2018)
Represented the Children’s Guardian in an application by the father for a transfer of residence. A fact-find established that the mother had alienated the father from the children; subsequently the Guardian recommended a transfer of residence which was ultimately ordered by the court following a contested final hearing.
V v G (2017)
Acted for the father seeking child arrangements orders in respect of his daughter in a long running protracted matter in the High Court which included the appointment of r.16.4 Guardian, committal proceedings against the mother (she was found guilty of contempt), a finding of fact and the making of Interim Supervision Orders in respect of the child.
FDR Hearing Service
Esther is available for private remote FDR hearings. For more information on private remote FDR hearings please click here.
-
Articles -
The difference between care orders and supervision orders
28th Feb 2017View Article -
CJEU judgment concerning a matter of jurisdiction in relation to parental responsibility and determination of jurisdiction
20th Feb 2017View ArticleEsther Lieu analyses W v X (Jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility) [2017] EUECJ C-499-15 for Family Law Week
-
Fact finding into serious injuries
30th Dec 2016View ArticleFact finding into serious injuries: Esther Lieu summarises A v W and Others No 1 (Fact Finding) [2016] EWFC 64 for Family Law Week.
-
Application to relocate to Utah opposed by father and Guardian but allowed by the court
20th Oct 2016View ArticleEsther Lieu analyses M v F [2016] EWHC 3194 (Fam) (Jan 2017) for Family Law Week.
-
Application for parental orders under HFEA 2008 adjourned generally due to the respondent’s refusal to consent to the order being made
28th Oct 2016View ArticleEsther Lieu summarises Re AB (Surrogacy: Consent) [2016] EWHC 2643 (Fam) (Nov 16).
-
Delayed child support proceedings a breach of Article 6 rights
3rd Aug 2016View ArticleECtHR Judgment finding that the delays in the mother’s enforcement proceedings against her former husband for unpaid child support constituted a breach of her Article 6 rights: Veiga da Silva Braga v Portugal (Application No. 39507/13) (Aug 16).
-
The separate representation of children in child abduction proceedings
6th Jan 2015View ArticleAn analysis by Esther Lieu for Family Law Week.
-
Family Drug and Alcohol Court: A Practitioners’ and Judge’s Perspective
31st Jul 2014View ArticleAn analysis by Sarah Jennings & Esther Lieu, 3PB, with District Judge Julie Exton look at the Family Drug and Alcohol Court for Family Law Week.
-
The Termination of Parental Responsibility
4th Mar 2014View ArticleEsther Lieu explores the circumstances in which parental responsibility may be terminated and considers the effect of s.4(2A) in anticipation of the Court of Appeal's judgment in the appeal from CW v SG.
-
Facilitating the Return of Abducted Children: the ECtHR Judgment in Raw v France
18th Mar 2013View ArticleEsther Lieu and Adam Weiss, Legal Director, The AIRE Centre, explain the ECtHR's recent decision in Raw v France which considered, amongst other matters, the enforcement of court orders and the circumstances in which a parent could represent their children in Strasbourg proceedings.
-
-
Recommendations 'Esther is able to build an excellent report with clients in extremely difficult circumstances, making them feel well-supported throughout the process. She is compassionate and approachable, as well as clear in her advice, and has excellent client care skills.'
Legal 500 2025/Divorce and Financial Remedy/Leading Juniors/Western Circuit“None of this would have been possible without your help and support - I am thrilled with the result and will always be incredibly grateful to you.”
Client
“Thank you for everything - for all the practical guidance, sound advice and the perfectionism with which you always drafted the pleadings and documents, all of which brought L to this point.”
Client
“I have felt very well supported by you throughout your involvement in this case and could not have been more confident in your representation of me in the court room”
Client
“I just wanted to email to pass on my thanks as Esther has been fantastic and greatly helped with settling the financial case for the client as well a previously settling the children act case for another client as well.”
Solicitor
"Esther Lieu was outstanding, she was supportive and explained my options very clearly. She was very understanding and knowledgeable."
Client
Related News
-
3PB’s specialist family law barrister Esther Lieu (pictured here) has recently been appointed a guest lecturer to teach students taking a Master of Science (MSc) in Advanced Child Protection at the University of Birmingham. Esther is described by colleagues, clients and students as ‘outstanding’, ‘supportive’ and ‘knowledgeable’. Formerly counsel on public law children issues, Esther Lieu now exclusively practises within financial remedies and private law children, advising on cases involving financial provision following divorce or...
Continue reading -
In Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v K and C [2015] EWCOP 80, MacDonald J held that ‘K’ had the capacity to choose to refuse further medical treatment that would invariably lead to her death. In Birmingham City Council v D (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) and W [2016] EWCOP 8, Keehan J considered the role and limitation of parental consent in respect of deprivations of liberty. In Re CS (Termination of...
Continue reading
