BC v BC [2025] EWFC 236
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2025/236?court=ewhc%2Ffam&court=ewfc
Peel J
Related
BC v BC [2025] EWFC 236
Peel J. Save for four specific matters, parties cannot refer to what happened at the pFDR. The Financial Remedies Court – Primary Principles paragraph 8 issued by Mostyn J and HHJ Hess goes too far by saying that the court should be told that offers were made and that an was indication given.
Financial Remedy Reform – ‘Fairness’ – Do Divorcing Parties Get Any Say – Time for Some Soul Searching for Family Law Professionals
The Law Commission Scoping Report
The Law Commission’s 373-page scoping report on Financial Remedies on Divorce and Dissolution, which was published just before Christmas 2024, stated categorically (emboldened emphasis):
‘1.58 In our view, the current law relating to financial remedies on divorce and dissolution does not, to use
DR Corner: Introducing Assent: Combining Arbitration and Private FDRs in a Streamlined Process based on the FPR Directions
Anyone who has tried to arrange a Private Financial Dispute Resolution (pFDR) will be familiar with that sinking feeling when the process is slipping away. It starts with a low-level dispute over the judge, the date or the location of the hearing. Then a seemingly innocuous question about disclosure. A
Related
BC v BC [2025] EWFC 236
Peel J. Save for four specific matters, parties cannot refer to what happened at the pFDR. The Financial Remedies Court – Primary Principles paragraph 8 issued by Mostyn J and HHJ Hess goes too far by saying that the court should be told that offers were made and that an was indication given.
Financial Remedy Reform – ‘Fairness’ – Do Divorcing Parties Get Any Say – Time for Some Soul Searching for Family Law Professionals
The Law Commission Scoping Report
The Law Commission’s 373-page scoping report on Financial Remedies on Divorce and Dissolution, which was published just before Christmas 2024, stated categorically (emboldened emphasis):
‘1.58 In our view, the current law relating to financial remedies on divorce and dissolution does not, to use
DR Corner: Introducing Assent: Combining Arbitration and Private FDRs in a Streamlined Process based on the FPR Directions
Anyone who has tried to arrange a Private Financial Dispute Resolution (pFDR) will be familiar with that sinking feeling when the process is slipping away. It starts with a low-level dispute over the judge, the date or the location of the hearing. Then a seemingly innocuous question about disclosure. A
Latest
Cross-examination in Financial Remedy Claims
[2026] 2 FRJ 88. Cross-examination can have a material impact on the court’s findings of fact and determination of issues. This article is written for the occasional cross-examiner, as an aide mémoire of the rules, as a guide to doing the job well.
A Fairer End? Gaps in the Government’s Nuptial Agreement Proposals
On 5 June 2026, the Government published A Fairer End to Relationships, proposing comprehensive reform of the financial consequences of both divorce and separation for unmarried couples. This piece focuses on the Government’s plan to introduce binding qualifying nuptial agreements (QNAs).
50 Years on from Martin v Martin 1976 – Are Add-backs Fit for Purpose?
[2026] 2 FRJ 94. Add-backs were a useful mechanism to prevent one party’s unilateral dissipation of assets which unfairly prejudiced the non-dissipating spouse’s share. But something has gone wrong when the outcomes deviate too far from what the average person considers fair.