Even those who are not football fans have likely heard of the dispute between Manchester City and England player Kyle Walker and self-coined ‘influencer’ Lauryn Goodman. Despite being in a relationship with his now-wife Annie for over 15 years, Walker regrettably fathered two children with Goodman. Kairo was born in April 2020 and Kinara in June 2023.
The parties had already been through a lengthy court battle to determine the financial provision for Kairo but proceedings were initiated by Goodman again after Kinara’s birth. Exactly two days after her birth, to be precise.
Following a two-day final hearing, the judgement was published on 30th July 2024 with minimal redactions thanks to Judge Hess’ transparency decision. The case has of course been plastered all over the tabloids but it raises important points to be considered in the world of family law.
Goodman made her application under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 which enables a parent to seek financial provision for the benefit of the involved children. It is important to clarify that unmarried parents are limited in the extent to which they can make a claim against the other parent, it is strictly in relation to the financial needs of the children. Those needs are then carefully scrutinised by the court. It is this point that Goodman perhaps failed to consider, seeking extortionate funds for furnishings, air conditioning, new cars and even an astro-turf football field claiming her 1 year old daughter had shown enough talent to be a ‘Lioness’.
Within the proceedings concerning the parties’ first child, Walker agreed to provide Goodman with £1.85 million to buy a property in Sussex, later voluntarily agreeing to increase that sum to £2.4 million. Goodman was also provided with £75,000 to furnish the property, a £45,000 car every 4 years, £8,000 a month in periodical payments as well as nursery fees, a trust fund for Kairo and more.
With Walker’s income ranging from £7 million to £10 million (gross) per year, those awards may not seem so extortionate. However, when dealing with Goodman’s second application, Judge Hess still had to consider reasonable need and affordability, despite Walker’s significant income.
It was agreed that now there was a second child, there would be a greater need for additional financial support. Walker was content to agree to an increase in the monthly periodical payments as well as an extension of the life insurance in place, education fees and other provisions. However, it was Goodman’s further requests, such as an increased car allowance so she could buy only Mercedes GLEs for £70,000 as well as a £30,000 car for the nanny, that were criticised.
Judge Hess sensibly commented that although Walker’s current income was considerable, many footballers end their careers in their late 30’s. At age 34, Walker may only have a few more years before his income drops, at which point, he has the right to revert back to the court to reduce his financial support. Judge Hess was clear that no matter the size of the resources, it is a requirement to objectively determine what is reasonably needed.
Unsurprisingly, many of Goodman’s outlandish requests were denied and a modest but fair increase to the financial support for the children was awarded. Within his judgement, Judge Hess implied Goodman’s requests were perhaps an attempt to inflate the children’s needs so she could support her own lavish lifestyle.
As well as arguments regarding needs, Judge Hess was asked to determine whether the case judgement should be anonymised. Of course, journalists called for transparency and Judge Hess was minded to agree with them. Goodman was not in support of the case being published but she was reminded that she herself had liaised heavily with the tabloids, in particular, taking Kairo to a championship game with a football shirt that read ‘Daddy’ on the back.
When you take away the huge sums of money and gossip column headlines, this case is an important reminder of the court’s discretion and power. If you are considering a Schedule 1 application, it is crucial to carefully consider the financial needs of your children and whether they are reasonable.
At E J Coombs, we can guide you through the available options to try and reach a resolution quickly and effectively, without excessive costs. Arrange an appointment via the link below to speak with one of our solicitors.
