brock
18-05-2006, 11:02 AM
As a point of interest for everyone - a high court judge in the family division ruled on the guidance issue several years ago. Fundamentally he said that 'Guidance is exactly that - it is not law. Whilst there must be compelling argument to allow you to ignore or disregard official guidance it nevertheless remains as guidance and it is not compulsary to follow it'
I think his point about the requirement to have 'compelling argument' not to follow official guidance is powerful but nevertheless he made it clear it is there to guide and is not a legislative requirement
Food for thought anyway eh?
I think his point about the requirement to have 'compelling argument' not to follow official guidance is powerful but nevertheless he made it clear it is there to guide and is not a legislative requirement
Food for thought anyway eh?