DB v DLJ [2016] EWHC 324 (Fam)
Judgment date: 24 February 2016
Related
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.
DR Corner: Arbitration, Litigation and Biscuits
[2026] 1 FRJ 70. A member of the author's chambers once described the private FDR as a court FDR, with biscuits. But arbitration and litigation are also different in other important ways, and arbitration is not just another form of consensual non-court dispute resolution (NCDR).
Silberschmidt v Richards [2025] EWHC 2841 (Fam)
Poole J. Husband’s appeal against setting aside of final consent order for fraudulent non-disclosure dismissed; wife’s delay not determinative.
Read the journal
Financial Remedies Journal – 2026 Issue 1 | Spring
Related
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.
DR Corner: Arbitration, Litigation and Biscuits
[2026] 1 FRJ 70. A member of the author's chambers once described the private FDR as a court FDR, with biscuits. But arbitration and litigation are also different in other important ways, and arbitration is not just another form of consensual non-court dispute resolution (NCDR).
Silberschmidt v Richards [2025] EWHC 2841 (Fam)
Poole J. Husband’s appeal against setting aside of final consent order for fraudulent non-disclosure dismissed; wife’s delay not determinative.
Latest
The Curious Case of CA 1989 Schedule 1 paragraph 2(3)
Paragraph 1 of CA 1989 Schedule 1 is headed ‘Orders for financial relief against parents’. Paragraph 2 is headed ‘Orders for financial relief for persons over eighteen’. As recent cases have demonstrated this structure causes complications.
The 2026 FRC Guide: What Practitioners Need to Know
Watch the recording of ‘The 2026 FRC Guide: What Practitioners Need to Know’, first broadcast on Wednesday 6th May 2026 with the authors of the new FRC Guide - HHJ Edward Hess, Nicholas Allen KC, Michael Allum, Lily Mottahedan and Rhys Taylor
Mazur in the Court of Appeal: the Judgment That Saved Half the Profession from Accidental Criminality
The Court of Appeal rewrites the landscape of ‘conduct of litigation’ – Mazur & Stuart v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP & Ors [2026] EWCA Civ 369.