Alona Sloutsker v Vladimir Sloutsker & Ors [2025] EWFC 369
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2025/369?query=%5B2025%5D+EWFC+369
Alona Sloutsker v Vladimir Sloutsker & Ors - Find Case Law - The National Archives

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE GARRIDO
Related
FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked
Is it a shield to non-disclosure by one party during financial remedy proceedings if the other party could (and perhaps should) have asked? The duty on parties to give full and frank financial disclosure is not merely a private obligation between them; it is a duty to the court.
Rt. Hon. The Countess Karen Anne Spencer v Rt. Hon. Ninth Earl Spencer, Charles Edward Maurice Spencer [2025] EWFC 431
Peel J. Appeal by W for further details of an arbitration award to be disclosed to the associated KBD proceedings and to ‘any persons’. Peel J permitted minimal further disclosure in order to provide the King’s Bench court with full context but emphasised the confidential nature of arbitration.
BY v GC (No 3: Costs) [2026] EWFC 50
Mr Nicholas Allen KC (sitting as a deputy High Court judge). Costs hearing in Financial Remedy proceedings. W sought recovery from H of legal costs across a range of categories, including those of defending a Daniels v Walker application by H.
Read the journal
Financial Remedies Journal – 2026 Issue 1 | Spring
Related
FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked
Is it a shield to non-disclosure by one party during financial remedy proceedings if the other party could (and perhaps should) have asked? The duty on parties to give full and frank financial disclosure is not merely a private obligation between them; it is a duty to the court.
Rt. Hon. The Countess Karen Anne Spencer v Rt. Hon. Ninth Earl Spencer, Charles Edward Maurice Spencer [2025] EWFC 431
Peel J. Appeal by W for further details of an arbitration award to be disclosed to the associated KBD proceedings and to ‘any persons’. Peel J permitted minimal further disclosure in order to provide the King’s Bench court with full context but emphasised the confidential nature of arbitration.
BY v GC (No 3: Costs) [2026] EWFC 50
Mr Nicholas Allen KC (sitting as a deputy High Court judge). Costs hearing in Financial Remedy proceedings. W sought recovery from H of legal costs across a range of categories, including those of defending a Daniels v Walker application by H.
Latest
Portals: Bringing It All Together
Tips and tricks on using the digital court portals from a member of the stakeholder group for the profession, including how to avoid the double login, when to denote documents as confidential, and how to prompt a response from the court.
FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked
Is it a shield to non-disclosure by one party during financial remedy proceedings if the other party could (and perhaps should) have asked? The duty on parties to give full and frank financial disclosure is not merely a private obligation between them; it is a duty to the court.
The Reluctant Pension Credit Member
[2026] 1 FRJ 39. In the case of AP v TP [2025] EWFC 190 (B) a financial remedy order was made by consent, following an FDR, which included a pension sharing order in W’s favour. Difficulties began when W failed to provide the necessary information to permit the pension share to be implemented.