‘Sue Brookes, Principle Associate and Nicola Rowlings, Professional Support Lawyer, at Mills & Reeve LLP consider the most important news and case law relating to financial remedies and divorce during January 2022.’
Family Law Week, 3rd February 2022
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The Family Court is seeing an increasing number of cases where property is (or is asserted to be) owned by a third party. As more parents assist children with purchasing a home or friends buy with friends, it is ever more likely that a financial provision case will involve consideration of who owns what. Here are some tips on how to approach such a case.’
Becket Chambers, 19th October 2021
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘The purpose of this article, is to consider the application of the section 25 criteria and in particular the issue of company valuation in the case of E v L [2021] EWFC 60, as decided by Mostyn J.’
Becket Chambers, 29th October 2021
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘Stephanie Hawthorn, associate, and Robert Jackson, trainee solicitor, at Mills & Reeve LLP, consider the important news and case law relating to financial remedies and divorce during September 2021.’
Family Law Week, 8th October 2021
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘From 13 September 2021 it will be mandatory for any divorce petition being issued by a solicitor in England and Wales to be issued via the HMCTS online portal. Paper applications will no longer be permitted. The HMCTS online divorce and financial remedy portal has come a long way since its launch in May 2018 and this is yet another important development for the provision of digital solutions in divorce and financial remedy case.’
Family Law, 17th September 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The parties became engaged in 2016 married in 2017 and separated in 2019. The parties disagreed over the date of cohabitation, the wife saying 2016 and the husband denying there was any cohabitation before marriage.’
Becket Chambers, 13th August 2021
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘In E v L, Mr Justice Mostyn considered an application for financial remedies following a short marriage. He concluded the fact that the marriage was childless was irrelevant to whether there should be a departure from the application of the equal sharing principle. Moreover, there was no reason to distinguish between an accrual (of assets) over a short marriage and an accrual over a longer marriage. The statutory factor of the duration of marriage was likely to be reflected in any event in that an acquest over a shorter period was likely to be less. Mostyn J also considered the approach to valuing businesses in this case where three accountants gave “hot-tub” evidence as to the value of one of the husband’s companies.’
1 GC: Family Law, 10th August 2021
Source: 1gc.com
‘The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years. However, the conundrum can be even more challenging when considering personal injury damages that one party may have received in order to meet their specific needs arising from an accident or injury.’
Family Law, 12th August 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The statutory criteria to decide what is a fair financial settlement on divorce comes from the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, now almost 50 years old. In reality it derives from judge made law. This has the benefit of being responsive and able to change. It has the disadvantage that there is no public or policy input into the law or changes in the law. It has the significant difficulty that by reference to almost unfettered discretion with propensity for contradictions or nuances in the judge made law it encourages litigation and discourages early settlement. David Hodson has proposed to the Law Commission, in its request for topics for its 14th programme of reform, that there should be a review of the criteria for fair and appropriate financial settlements. This sets out his proposals for the need for reform. It is in a question-and-answer process as required by the Law Commission for any submissions. It would be very helpful to hear from other lawyers and members of the public with their opinions on whether reform is needed and, far more problematical, what that reform should be.’
Family Law, 12th August 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The UK’s formal system for child support arrangements between separated families, without involving the courts, is provided by the Child Maintenance Service (CMS). This succeeded the Child Support Agency (CSA), first established in 1993 with the Child Support Act 1991.’
House of Commons Library, 20th July 2021
Source: commonslibrary.parliament.uk
‘Joshua Viney, barrister, and Henry Pritchard, pupil barrister, both of 1 Hare Court, explore the circumstances in which it might be unfair to apply the CMS formula.’
Family Law Week, 14th July 2021
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Not for the first time, the reported cases are dominated by parties with limited connection with England and Wales, or indeed with the quotidian financial experience of most of those involved in litigation before our courts. There is a handful of cases which address the impact of the pandemic but, as Judge Kloss observed in one, the fact that there has not been a ‘tsunami’ of Barder applications suggests that the exceptionality condition for such applications is being recognised.’
St John's Chambers, 8th June 2021
Source: www.stjohnschambers.co.uk
‘It seems there has been a never-ending line of costs commentary flowing through the reported decisions from financial remedy courts as of late. There is a clear trend of encouraging the making of costs orders; something that was far from the norm of no costs orders in contested financial remedy proceedings a few years ago. The reasons for this encouragement are many and possibly speculative; perhaps a by-product of the cuts to Legal Aid and therefore the lack of access to legal representation inevitably leading to extensive, unnecessary, and unmeritorious litigation, perhaps a consequence of the continued backlog in the family courts, perhaps an ancillary product of the widening parameters of judicial discretion and uncertainty?’
Family Law, 3rd June 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially conduct arguments contrary to s25(g) through the back door by making “negative contribution” arguments, and it also highlights the importance of ensuring that you adduce and apply for the most appropriate and necessary evidence in advance of a hearing. Simply arguing that an updated pension report is needed, following an appeal hearing, on the basis that the pension sharing order made would not reflect the judge’s intentions as the CE figures would be significantly out of date, is insufficient and misconceived.’
Family Law. 14th May 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Joseph Rainer and Thomas Haggie, barristers of Queen Elizabeth Building, consider third-party assets and their bearing on the court’s assessment of resources in financial remedy cases.’
Family Law Week, 28th April 2021
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The son of an oligarch caught up in the world’s largest divorce case has been told to pay £75m to his mother after a judge at the high court in London found he was “a dishonest individual who will do anything to assist his father”.’
The Guardian, 21st April 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A short but important judgment emphasising the costs consequence that a litigant may face if they have failed to negotiate openly and reasonably in the context of financial remedy proceedings was handed down by Mostyn J on 12 March 2021 in the case of LM v DM (Costs Ruling) [2021] EWFC 28.’
Family Law, 30th March 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Jo Carr-West, partner with Hunters, considers the implications of Mr Justice Mostyn’s recent judgment in AZ v FM.’
Family Law Week, 16th March 2021
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Few would have thought back on 1 March 2020 that we would, some 12 months later, be facing the first birthday of the strictest restrictions on personal freedoms in living memory. As we approach the anniversary of the first lockdown on 23 March 2020, it seems appropriate that we reconsider one of key questions of family lawyers back in Spring 2020, that of whether the pandemic was likely to satisfy the principles set down in the 1987 case of Barder v Barder [1987] 2 FLR 480. Unprecedented times, there is no doubt, but unprecedented enough to constitute a Barder event?’
Family Law, 12th March 2021
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Richard Kershaw, partner at Hunters Law LLP, considers the implications of Mr Justice Cohen’s judgment in FRB v DRC (No 3).’
Family Law Week, 25th February 2021
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024