Chai v Peng [2017] EWHC 792 (Fam)
Judgment date: 06 April 2017
Related
Michael v Michael (No. 3) [2025] EWFC 245
HHJ Hess, sitting as a DHCJ, addressing business valuations in a financial remedy final hearing.
X v Y [2025] EWFC 144 (B)
DJ Stone. A (misconstrued) application to appeal a final financial order out of time, ultimately determined as an application to vary pursuant to Thwaite jurisdiction.
Awolowo v Awolowo & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 641
Moylan LJ, Popplewell LJ and Sir Christopher Floyd. Wife wins appeal over £1.6m ‘loan’ tied to the family home.
Read the journal
Financial Remedies Journal – 2025 Issue 2 | Summer
Related
Michael v Michael (No. 3) [2025] EWFC 245
HHJ Hess, sitting as a DHCJ, addressing business valuations in a financial remedy final hearing.
X v Y [2025] EWFC 144 (B)
DJ Stone. A (misconstrued) application to appeal a final financial order out of time, ultimately determined as an application to vary pursuant to Thwaite jurisdiction.
Awolowo v Awolowo & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 641
Moylan LJ, Popplewell LJ and Sir Christopher Floyd. Wife wins appeal over £1.6m ‘loan’ tied to the family home.
Latest
Parliamentary Debate Reveals Government’s Latest Intentions for Financial Remedies and Cohabitation Law Reform
The Government gave a significant update on Monday 10 November 2025 in the House of Lords regarding its plans for financial remedies and cohabitation law reform. It signals a major overhaul of how the law treats relationship breakdown across all types of couples.
Promises Unkept: Unpaid Child Maintenance and the Price of Inaction
Unpaid child maintenance remains one of the most persistent and under-addressed financial injustices affecting separated families in England and Wales. The failures of the CMS destabilise the very integrity of financial provision for children post-separation.
Finality and Funding: a Further Thought on CC v UU Concerning the Availability of LSPOs for Enforcement Proceedings
In the case of CC v UU, concerning post-final order LSPOs, did Peel J fall into error? Should the judgment have been decided differently?