Hadkinson Orders: the Need to Show Restraint

This article addresses ‘Hadkinson’ orders, in light of several recent cases handed down over a short period of time, highlighting the potential limitations as to their availability.

• Blog

• Hadkinson Orders

• Rebecca Cross
• Nicholas Starks

!17/04/2024 10:22

D v D [2024] EWFC 7612 March 2024

HHJ Booth, sitting as a judge of the High Court: 25:75 division in favour of H following breakdown of second marriage and H’s substantial assets. Court considered W’s needs should be generously interpreted to overcome lack of SJE evidence as to W’s ill health. Needs would include W’s outstanding costs as summarily assessed by the court.

• Cases

• Interest
• Spousal Maintenance (Quantum)
• Duxbury Capitalisation
• Experts
• Costs
• Housing Need
• Matrimonial and Non-Matrimonial Property

• Liam Kelly

Nazir & Nazir v Begum [2024] EWHC 378 (KB)21 February 2024

Freedman J. A person is not to be regarded as being in adverse possession of an estate when the estate is subject to a trust: see Schedule 6, paragraph 12, to the Land Registration Act 2002. Does this include a situation in which land is held by the personal representatives of a deceased person by virtue of s 33 Administration of Estates Act 1925?

• Cases

• Adverse Possession
• Land Registration Act 2002
• Intestacy
• Administration Of Estates

• Sophia Paraskeva

TK v LK [2024] EWFC 712 April 2024

Enormously helpful review of Sch 1 authorities re (i) the jurisdiction to make a Schedule 1 award after a clean break in divorce proceedings, (ii) the relevance of parental conduct in Schedule 1 proceedings, (iii) dependence and the reversion of capital and (iv) costs.

• Cases

• Conduct
• Costs
• Children Act 1989 Schedule 1 Applications
• Child Maintenance
• Case Management

• Elizabeth Bowden

Conduct and Its Consequences: Goddard-Watts and TK v LK

In ‘Is It Time to Consign the “Gasp” Factor to the History Books?’, Olivia Piercy and Anita Mehta considered whether three decisions might herald a significant change in the courts’ approach to domestic abuse, including economic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour, as ‘conduct’ that it would be ‘inequitable to disregard’. If there is a nascent consensus that it is time for a change in approach, that view may not be universally held.

• Blog

• Conduct

• Andrew Day

!15/04/2024 21:08