ED v AP [2025] EWFC 399
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2025/399.html
Access denied
His Honour Judge Edward Hess
Related
ED v AP [2025] EWFC 399
Judgment date: 23 September 2025
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2025/399
HHJ Hess (sitting as deputy High Court judge). Final hearing in financial remedy proceedings. The judge dealt with how to formulate a fair Wells sharing order concerning contingent interests the Husband might receive as a result of
Culligan v Culligan (No 3) (Terms of Order) [2025] EWFC 186
MacDonald J. The court determined the terms of an order following a final hearing in January, which saw an equal division of the matrimonial assets following a 40-year marriage, including Wells sharing.
Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26
Judgment date: 2 July 2025
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uksc/2025/26
Lord Burrows and Lord Stephens (with whom Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lady Simler agree). The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed W’s appeal, upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision, and clarified application of the sharing principle
Read the journal
Financial Remedies Journal – 2025 Issue 3 | Winter
Related
ED v AP [2025] EWFC 399
Judgment date: 23 September 2025
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2025/399
HHJ Hess (sitting as deputy High Court judge). Final hearing in financial remedy proceedings. The judge dealt with how to formulate a fair Wells sharing order concerning contingent interests the Husband might receive as a result of
Culligan v Culligan (No 3) (Terms of Order) [2025] EWFC 186
MacDonald J. The court determined the terms of an order following a final hearing in January, which saw an equal division of the matrimonial assets following a 40-year marriage, including Wells sharing.
Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26
Judgment date: 2 July 2025
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uksc/2025/26
Lord Burrows and Lord Stephens (with whom Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lady Simler agree). The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed W’s appeal, upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision, and clarified application of the sharing principle
Latest
An End to Secrecy in Family Courts? Proposed Reforms of Contempt of Court Law That Could Lift the Threats to Sharing Information
It’s common knowledge that people involved in family court proceedings held in private are very restricted in what they can say about what’s happening. The confusing part is when someone might be in contempt of court just for talking or writing about their case, even when anonymised.
The Absent Owner – Varying Beneficial Interests Upon Separation: an Analysis of the Leading Cases
Considering TLATA cases where A and B are joint owners of a family home, the relationship breaks down, and A vacates leaving B in occupation and financially responsible for the property, and then A returns years later seeking their share of the net equity.
When Might an Arbitration Not Be Entirely Private and Confidential?
One of the great virtues of family law arbitration is its ability to provide the parties with confidentiality and privacy for their dispute. Unlike court proceedings, the parties will not face the risk of the hearing taking place in open court with curious members of the public present.