Judge Booth is right in his latest judgment that there are only limited numbers of reported cases from the Appeal courts, being those that set precedent for other family cases, when it comes to couples divorcing where there are 'not enough assets to go around'.  It can be an expensive process to appeal and in the cases I believe he is thinking about I suspect a lot of couples feel it is just not worth the cost or the delays in reaching a resolution that it causes.

However, in my view the greater issue is the very limited range of reported cases dealing with one parent seeking financial support from the other parent for their children.  The reported cases tend to involve multi-millionaire fathers, which means that the principles they set down don't always seem sensible where the parties have more modest resources. For these clients, the experience of their lawyer is crucial in developing solutions that are attractive for both parties to settle matters in the best way for their family, rather than necessarily dogmatically just following the precedent cases.