Episode 1 of our new series of bitesize videos is out now!

27 April 2026

Equal shared care … so no child maintenance liability, right? Wrong. It's one of the most persistent myths in family law: if care is shared equally, there's no obligation to pay child maintenance. But as Mark Ablett and Tara Lyons explain in our first bitesize video, the reality is far more nuanced, and the recent decision of HHJ Hess in OS v DT, has brought the issue sharply into focus.

The CMS only has jurisdiction over a "qualifying child," which requires a non-resident parent. Under Regulation 50 of the 2012 Regulations, where care is shared equally, there is no non-resident parent; and therefore no qualifying child. The CMS doesn't make a finding of nil liability. It simply has no jurisdiction. But who decides whether care is shared equally? And if it is the Family Court, how does that sit with Holman J’s decision in Dickson v Rennie, that only the CMS can determine the level of someone’s income for the purposes of a top up order? Watch and find out!

Back to News Listing