‘The end of the summer holidays is a peak period for breakups. But now couples are looking for fast and amicable ways to avoid being mired in the blame game, will the law finally catch up?’
The Guardian, 23rd August 2016
‘Resolving neighbour disputes using iPhone evidence and a video hearing might be more effective than the parties travelling several miles to court, a senior government official has said, outlining significant developments to modernise the justice system.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 21st July 2016
‘In K v K (Financial Remedy Final Order prior to Decree Nisi) 2016 EWFC 23, Cobb J remitted a case for rehearing on the basis that the trial judge had made an order prior to the grant of decree nisi of divorce. The case provides a salutary warning for lawyers about the limits of the Family Court’s powers to correct what was an innocent and – at first glance – merely procedural mistake.’
Tanfield Chambers, 22nd June 2016
‘”Yasmeenah” is seeking an Islamic divorce from her husband and has turned to a Sharia council in the hope one will be granted by Islamic scholars.
This council at Birmingham Central Mosque is one of an estimated 30 established councils across the UK, often referred to as Sharia “courts”.
The BBC has been given rare access.’
BBC News, 11th July 2016
‘Workers unfairly dismissed by their employers are being denied access to justice because of new Government court fees, a cross party committee of MPs has warned. Since the new employment tribunal fees were introduced in 2013 there has been a “precipitate drop” of almost 70 per cent in the number of cases being brought, the Commons Justice committee said. It can now cost as much as £1,200 simply to bring a claim.’
The Independent, 20th June 2016
‘Not long ago I was involved in financial relief proceedings involving a couple both of whom were on their second marriage (of some 12 years duration). The wife had children in their twenties from a previous marriage. As usual, the most substantial asset was the Former Matrimonial Home, with a notional net equity of nearly £400,000. This had been purchased with funds mainly, but not quite exclusively, provided by the husband who was retired. Neither party had a high income.’
Park Square Barristers, 26th May 2016
‘Baroness Hale was primarily responsible for the introduction of compensation (SRJ v DWJ  2 FLR 176). She is a fine lawyer and judge, but she was only briefly an advocate. I am no judge at all with a degree in English, but I have argued a lot of cases. Whilst doing so I have appeared against some outstanding advocates such as Lord Wilson, the late Mrs Justice Baron, Mr Justice Mostyn and Mr Martin Pointer QC. As advocates they looked and in the case of Martin, look to persuade the court. I believe that in presenting a wife’s arguments they would all have rejected submitting that she should be compensated for gender related disadvantage. They would have done so for various reasons. Compensation is a dangerous word as it has its most natural and best established use in the law of tort. It is also manifestly insensitive. Any husband who has maintained his wife and children for, say fifteen years will be hurt and annoyed by the proposition that he should compensate his wife for the experience. He may, or may not be placated by the subsequent reference to gender related disadvantage. At least that shows compensation is a systemic concept, rather than directed at him personally. But fully expressed the words display the origin of the concept in a feminist approach to divorce. The advocate would know that some tribunals would reject the socio-legal concept; if only because another feminist analysis would give primacy to the wife’s autonomous ability to look after.’
The 36 Group, 18th May 2016