Changes to Child Maintenance – Family Law Week
“Anna Heenan, Solicitor at Gregg Latchams LLP explains the latest changes to the child support regime.”
Family Law Week, 3rd September 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“Anna Heenan, Solicitor at Gregg Latchams LLP explains the latest changes to the child support regime.”
Family Law Week, 3rd September 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“A business tycoon who lied about his wealth in a £1.8m divorce settlement has been told he may have to pay more after a judge ruled couples have a duty to tell each other the truth when striking deals.”
Daily Telegraph, 29th August 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A Russian wife has been awarded one of the highest divorce settlements ever made by an English court after a judge ruled that she should receive more than £53 million from her ex-husband.”
Daily Telegraph, 14th August 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Jessica Craigs, senior solicitor and David Salter, Joint Head of Family Law at Mills & Reeve LLP analyse the financial remedies and divorce news and cases published in July.”
Family Law Week, 7th August 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“It might be that the sanction of committal for contempt for ignoring orders of the court in respect of providing proper financial information in divorce proceedings may be more likely than before – partly in view of the new climate intended to be fostered by the ‘Jackson’ reforms.”
Sovereign Chambers, 22nd July 2013
Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk
“Jessica Craigs, solicitor and David Salter, Joint Head of Family Law at Mills & Reeve LLP analyse the financial remedies and divorce news and cases published in June.”
Family Law Week, 8th July 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“Henry Clayton of 4 Paper Buildings outlines the consequences where a party to financial remedy proceedings becomes bankrupt after the making of a final order.”
Family Law Week, 28th June 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“To widespread surprise, the Supreme Court allowed the wife’s appeal in Prest v Petrodel Resources [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] All ER (D) 90 (Jun) although on a different basis from the decision of Mr Justice Moylan at first instance. For those law “nerds” amongst us, the new Supreme Court live feed added an extra frisson, with social media abuzz with speculation as to what it might mean that Lord Sumption was to give the lead judgment. It quickly became clear that this may be a red herring (for Lady Hale to give the lead judgment would have been too obvious a clue). However, a more detailed consideration of the judgment may lead us to conclude that Lord Sumption was a clue indeed and that the corporate veil has survived fully intact, albeit it with the Supreme Court wedging open some doors for family lawyers on the issues of trusts and inferences to be drawn from both pre- and post-litigation behaviour.”
New Law Journal, 27th June 2013
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
“A wife persuaded a court to freeze £20 million of her husband’s assets using papers she raided from his safe while he was out playing golf, a High Court judge has disclosed.”
Daily Telegraph, 25th June 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
The Daily Telegraph have recently introduced a limited paywall. Users will be permitted to view 20 Daily Telegraph articles per month for free, after which they will need to pay a subscription fee to access content.
“David Burrows continues his review of how LASPO has influenced the funding landscape of family litigation.”
New Law Journal, 20th June 2013
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
Prest v Prest and others [2013] UKSC 34; [2013] WLR (D) 237
“If a person was under an existing legal obligation or liability, or subject to an existing legal restriction, which he deliberately evaded or the enforcement he deliberately frustrated by interposing a company under his control, the court could ‘pierce the corporate veil’ but only for the purpose of depriving the company or its controller of the advantage which they would otherwise have obtained by the company’s separate legal personality.”
WLR Daily, 12th June 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“In summary, the Supreme Court (comprising Lords Neuberger, Walker, Mance, Clarke, Wilson, Sumption and Lady Hale) has unanimously upheld the wife’s appeal and found that the Respondent group of companies held the assets on trust for the Husband. The assets therefore constitute property to which the husband is ‘entitled, either in possession or reversion’ for the purposes of section 24(1)(a) MCA.”
Zenith Chambers, 12th June 2013
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“On 12th June 2013, the Supreme Court delivered judgment in the eagerly anticipated appeal in Prest v Petrodel Resources Limited [2013] UKSC 34. For the second time this year, the Supreme Court has had to grapple with the circumstances in which it is appropriate to pierce the corporate veil, the previous decision being that of VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp [2013] 2 WLR 398 (a case in which a number of 11 SB members were involved). Unlike in VTB Capital, however, this time the Supreme Court grasped the nettle and gave some practical guidance as to the reach and limitations of the doctrine.”
Full story (PDF)
11 Stone Buildings, June 2013
Source: www.11sb.com
“John Wilson QC of 1 Hare Court analyses the Supreme Court’s judgment in the landmark case of Prest v Petrodel and considers its implications for family lawyers.”
Family Law Week, 14th June 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.com
Supreme Court, 12th June 2013
“Does a one-man company metamorphose into one man simply because the person with a wish to abstract its assets is his wife?”
The Guardian, 10th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“What are the implications of a court setting aside a disposal made by a divorcing spouse to a third party? Anna Heenan & Ed Heaton report.”
New Law Journal, 7th June 2013
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
“Millionaire businessmen will be able to ‘stick two fingers up’ at judges if the highest court in the land rules against a former wife in a high-profile divorce case this week, her lawyers said yesterday.”
The Independent, 9th June 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Alexander Chandler of 1 King’s Bench Walk, Temple, London revisits and updates an article originally published in February 2010 in light of changes brought about by the Family Procedure Rules 2010.”
Family Law Week, 24th May 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk