Why Schedule 1 is often misunderstood  

When people think of Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989, they may picture high-profile cases involving celebrities or millionaires. The 2024 case of Goodman v Walker – former England footballer Kyle Walker and model Lauryn Goodman – brought Schedule 1 to widespread public attention. With a housing budget of £1.35 million and monthly maintenance of £12,500 ordered by the court, the sums involved were exceptional.  

Unsurprisingly, cases like this tend to dominate media coverage and can leave ordinary parents with the impression that Schedule 1 is only relevant to famous people, footballers and the ultra-wealthy. In reality, that is far from the truth.  

It may come as a surprise to learn that these claims exist at all. Financial provision for children can extend well beyond standard child maintenance arrangements, even when parents were never married. Often, the immediate concern is how to provide security and consistency for children after separation, particularly where housing, education or day-to-day living costs are a concern. Schedule 1 was designed to help address those kinds of situations.  

What is Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989?  

Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 gives the Family Court the power to make financial orders for the benefit of children – including orders relating to housing, lump sum payments, school fees and ongoing maintenance. It applies primarily where parents were not married or in a civil partnership, since divorcing parents have separate and broader financial remedies available to them under matrimonial law. Or, if the paying parent lives abroad, the CMS has no jurisdiction to enforce payments, so a Schedule 1 application would be appropriate.  

The key point is that any money or property ordered under Schedule 1 is provided for the child – not for the parent making the claim. The caring parent may benefit practically, for example by living in a place that has been secured for the child, but the purpose of the order is to meet the child’s overall wellbeing. It is not, as the courts have made clear, a route to obtaining financial provision for a parent in their own right.  

How is this different from child maintenance?   Most separated parents are familiar with the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) – the government body that calculates and manages regular maintenance payments between parents. The CMS uses a formula based on the paying parent’s income and the number of children involved. For many families, a CMS assessment provides an appropriate level of support.  

However, the CMS has limits. Once a paying parent’s gross income exceeds £156,000 per year (£3,000 per week), the CMS reaches the top of its formula and can go no further. In those cases, a parent can apply to the court for a “top-up” maintenance order under Schedule 1 to seek additional support above that ceiling.  

Beyond top-up maintenance, Schedule 1 also allows for claims that a CMS assessment simply cannot cover, such as housing provision, school fees, disability-related costs and specific lump sum payments. These are not maintenance payments in the traditional sense. They are separate forms of financial provision that recognise the broader requirements a child may have.  

Who can make a Schedule 1 claim?  

A claim under Schedule 1 can be made by a parent, a guardian, a special guardian or any person named in a Child Arrangements Order as someone with whom the child is going to live. In some circumstances, a child who has reached the age of 18 may also apply directly – for example, if they are still in education or have a disability that requires ongoing financial support.  

Importantly, Schedule 1 claims are available to parents regardless of whether they were ever in a relationship. What matters is the child’s relationship with their parents, not whether those parents were ever living together or married. Families come in many different forms, and the law recognises that children’s welfare does not depend on whether their parents were in a long-term relationship.  

Why do these claims often involve unmarried parents?  

Unmarried couples who separate do not have access to the same financial remedies as a married couple who are divorcing. Under matrimonial law, a divorcing spouse can make a claim against their former partner’s assets, income and property in their own right. An unmarried parent cannot do this – they have no equivalent claim against a former partner simply by virtue of having lived together or having a child together.  

Many cohabiting couples assume they have similar rights to married couples, only discovering the real legal position after a relationship has ended. For some parents, this can come as an unwelcome shock while they are adjusting to major changes in family life and establishing new routines for their children.  

This means that for many unmarried parents, Schedule 1 is the primary legal route of seeking broader financial support for a child. As cohabiting couples now represent the fastest-growing family type in England and Wales, more and more families could find themselves in this position without realising.  

What can a Schedule 1 claim include?  

The court has a range of powers under Schedule 1:

Housing provision  

The court can order that a property be made available for the child and their primary carer to live in. This could be the former family home, another property owned by the paying parent, or one that is purchased after the separation. The court may also consider the type of property, location and general standard of living the child was accustomed to living in before their parents separated.  

This is sometimes called a “Mesher-style” arrangement where a property is held in trust (i.e. legally set aside) for the child’s benefit until a future point, such as when the child turns 18 or completes full-time education. At that point the property typically reverts to the paying parent. The caring parent does not own the property, but they and the child have the right to live there during that period.  

In practical terms, this may mean helping a child remain in a familiar home or stay in the local area, close to friends, school and support networks, at a time when so much else in their life is changing.  

Lump sum payments  

The court can order the payment of one or more lump sums – for example, to cover the cost of furnishing a home, purchasing a vehicle needed for childcare purposes, or meeting specific one-off expenses connected to the child’s welfare.  

Ongoing periodical payments  

Regular maintenance payments can be ordered in addition to or separately from any CMS assessment. Where a parent earns above the CMS ceiling, the court can make a top-up order to ensure the child’s welfare is met at an appropriate level.  

School fees and educational costs  

Where a child is already in private education (or where it is established that private education is appropriate given the family’s circumstances before the separation), the court can order a contribution towards school fees and related educational costs. If there is an existing Child Arrangements Order in place, this can also be relevant context when the court considers the child’s educational requirements. Maintaining continuity in education can  help a child retain a sense of normality after separation.  

Disability-related costs  

Where a child has a disability or additional needs, the court can take these circumstances into account. Orders can extend beyond the usual age of 18 in cases where a child’s disability means they are unable to live independently.  

Beyond celebrity cases and million-pound claims  

One of the most persistent misconceptions about Schedule 1 is that it is only relevant where one parent is extremely wealthy. The high-profile cases that tend to attract media attention – often involving celebrities or individuals with significant assets – give a misleading picture.  

In reality, Schedule 1 applies wherever there is a meaningful difference in financial circumstances between parents and where a child’s welfare cannot be adequately supported without court involvement. That could be a situation where one parent earns a comfortable professional salary and the other has little income, or where housing is genuinely unaffordable for the caring parent without assistance.  

In practice, people seeking advice about Schedule 1 are not dealing with vast fortunes or luxury lifestyles. They are simply trying to work out how their child can continue to be properly housed, supported and provided for after separation.  

The court’s focus remains on meeting the child’s day-to-day requirements, not redistributing wealth between adults. A claim that is proportionate to the circumstances and clearly focused on the child’s welfare is one the court will take seriously, regardless of whether the sums involved are modest or significant.  

How does the court decide what is appropriate?  

When assessing a Schedule 1 application, the court will look at all relevant circumstances, with the child’s welfare as the paramount consideration.  

Every family’s circumstances are different. Rather than applying a rigid formula, the court looks at the individual realities of each family’s situation. The key factors set out in the legislation include:   ·        

• financial support for the child, including housing, living costs and day-to-day care     
• any disability or additional needs the child has      
• the child’s education or training requirements, including existing or expected schooling arrangements         
• the income, earning capacity, property and financial resources of each parent – both now and in the future    
• the financial obligations of each parent, including responsibilities to other dependants      
• the standard of living the child would have enjoyed, had the family remained together  

That last factor is significant. In the leading case of Re P (Child: Financial Provision) [2003] EWCA Civ 837, the Court of Appeal confirmed that – where one parent is wealthy – the starting point should be to consider what home the child genuinely requires, and that the child’s standard of living should, to a reasonable extent, reflect the financial position of the wealthier parent. It is worth noting, however, that the court’s approach is always balanced. Excessive or unjustified claims will not be entertained.  

Understanding what Schedule 1 can realistically achieve  

Schedule 1 is a powerful legal tool, but it is important to approach any claim with clear and realistic expectations. For parents who are already experiencing significant change, understanding the purpose and limits of Schedule 1 from the outset is important.  

The court’s focus is on the child’s wellbeing – not on compensating a parent or achieving financial equality between the adults. Any property ordered under Schedule 1 will typically revert to the paying parent when the child reaches adulthood. Ongoing maintenance will usually end when the child turns 18 or completes full-time education, unless disability or other exceptional circumstances apply.  

The process can also take time, and both parents will be required to provide full financial disclosure. Cases involving complex financial arrangements, significant assets or disputed housing matters can take longer to resolve. Understanding what is realistic at the outset, before making a claim, can help avoid unnecessary stress.  

Why early legal advice matters  

One of the most important things anyone in this situation can do is seek legal advice early.  

Sometimes, parents only become aware of Schedule 1 after arrangements have already been made informally – sometimes in ways that are difficult to revisit later. Early advice can help you understand whether a claim is appropriate in your circumstances, what it might realistically include, and how to approach the process in a way that keeps the focus on your child’s welfare.  

Seeking advice does not mean committing to court proceedings. It simply provides clarity and reassurance at a time when both can be in short supply.  

It is also worth knowing that not every Schedule 1 matter must go to court. In some cases, parents are able to reach an agreement between themselves or through mediation, which can then be recorded in a formal legal document. This can be quicker, less costly and considerably less stressful than contested proceedings, particularly where the relationship between parents allows for constructive discussion.  

Where court proceedings are necessary, having specialist legal advice from the start can make a significant difference, both to the outcome and to how manageable the process feels.  

Keeping the focus on your child  

Whatever the financial circumstances, the purpose of Schedule 1 is straightforward – to ensure that children are properly provided for after their parents separate, regardless of whether those parents were ever married. Having a stable home, continuity in education and the resources needed to thrive are not exclusively the concerns of wealthy people. They are concerns shared by a wide range of families who simply want the best possible future for their children.  

Questions about financial support for children often arise at a time when families are already managing significant change. Understanding what options are available can provide reassurance and help parents make informed decisions about their child’s future.  

At K J Smith Solicitors, our family law specialists advise parents on all aspects of financial provision for children, including Schedule 1 applications. Through our ecosystem of care, we will also introduce you to a network of trusted professionals who can provide additional help where needed.  

If you would like to understand whether a Schedule 1 claim is relevant to your situation, you can arrange a free 45-minute consultation with our family law team.