Assoun v Assoun [2017] EWCA Civ 21
Judgment date: 28 March 2017
Related
WX v HX [2023] EWFC 279 (B)
Judgment date: 21 December 2023
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/b/2023/279
Mr Recorder Day’s judgment in a case involving complex procedural history, intervenors, non-disclosure and a ‘fragile’ business valuation. Of note is Recorder Day’s inclusion of his earlier decision to refuse a Hadkinson order. Recorder
WJB v HJM [2024] EWFC 116 (B)
Judgment date: 15 February 2024
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2024/116.html
District Judge Ashworth. This was an application by W for a Hadkinson order preventing H from pursuing his application to vary an order for periodical payments made in 2017 (‘the order’). The order provided
Hadkinson Orders: the Need to Show Restraint
This article addresses ‘Hadkinson’ orders (Hadkinson v Hadkinson [1952] All ER 567), in light of several recent cases handed down over a short period of time, highlighting the potential limitations as to their availability, namely:
* Williams v Williams [2023] EWHC 3098 (Fam) – Moor J
* WX v HX [2023] EWFC 279
Related
WX v HX [2023] EWFC 279 (B)
Judgment date: 21 December 2023
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/b/2023/279
Mr Recorder Day’s judgment in a case involving complex procedural history, intervenors, non-disclosure and a ‘fragile’ business valuation. Of note is Recorder Day’s inclusion of his earlier decision to refuse a Hadkinson order. Recorder
WJB v HJM [2024] EWFC 116 (B)
Judgment date: 15 February 2024
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2024/116.html
District Judge Ashworth. This was an application by W for a Hadkinson order preventing H from pursuing his application to vary an order for periodical payments made in 2017 (‘the order’). The order provided
Hadkinson Orders: the Need to Show Restraint
This article addresses ‘Hadkinson’ orders (Hadkinson v Hadkinson [1952] All ER 567), in light of several recent cases handed down over a short period of time, highlighting the potential limitations as to their availability, namely:
* Williams v Williams [2023] EWHC 3098 (Fam) – Moor J
* WX v HX [2023] EWFC 279
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.