Thirsk v Thirsk & Ors [2026] EWHC 1501 (Ch)
15 May 2026. Cusworth J. The claimant sought reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 following the death of her husband.
Monique Simone Fremder
read moreB v B (Declaration as to Marital Status) [2026] EWHC 1317 (Fam)
David Rees KC (sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court). The husband sought a declaration of marital status under s 55 of the Family Law Act 1986, asserting that the parties’ customary marriage under Cameroonian law had been dissolved by a customary divorce.
Gohil v Gohil & Ors [2025] EWHC 3646 (Fam)
Williams J. The High Court considered the impact of a £28m confiscation order, disputed beneficial ownership claims, and criminally tainted assets in a restored financial remedy claim following the Supreme Court's decision in Gohil v Gohil [2015] UKSC 61.
Kay v Martineau Johnson (a Firm) [2026] EWCA Civ 224
Newey, Males, and Lewis LJJ. The Court of Appeal held that a professional negligence claim arising from advice given in financial remedy proceedings was statute barred under s 14A Limitation Act 1980.
XX v GH (Legal Services Act 2007 Exemption), Re [2026] EWFC 51 (B)
HHJ Farquhar. Following the decision in Mazur, the Family Court refused an application to permit a Chartered Legal Executive to conduct litigation under the Legal Services Act 2007. Exemption from the statutory scheme should be granted only in exceptional circumstances and none arose in this case.
ABC v XYZ (Financial Remedies: Release from Undertakings and Variation of Periodical Payments Order) [2025] EWFC 370 (B)
DJ Maddison. Application by H to be released from undertakings and vary a nominal maintenance order following a significant change of circumstances. Reassessment of needs resulted in substantive joint lives provision.
PMC v Cwm Taf Morgannwg University Health Board [2025] EWCA Civ 1126
Sir Geoffrey Vos MR, Warby LJ and Whipple LJ allowed an appeal against the refusal of an anonymity order in a child's clinical negligence claim, confirming that courts retain a limited common law power to derogate from open justice where strictly necessary to protect vulnerable individuals.