FZ v SZ [2010] EWHC 1630 (Fam)
Judgment date: 05 July 2010
Related
BY v GC (No 2) [2025] EWFC 397
In this seven-day final hearing of a long marriage with adult children, the computation and distribution of a variety of assets were determined by a robust analysis and application of the case law by Mr Nicholas Allen KC.
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.
Read the journal
Financial Remedies Journal – 2025 Issue 3 | Winter
Related
BY v GC (No 2) [2025] EWFC 397
In this seven-day final hearing of a long marriage with adult children, the computation and distribution of a variety of assets were determined by a robust analysis and application of the case law by Mr Nicholas Allen KC.
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.
Latest
Sir James Munby: an Obituary
Sir Nicholas Mostyn writes about the life of Sir James Munby, who died on 1 January 2026: "a great leader, a brilliant historian, a remarkable lawyer, and a superb writer".
PD 27A Redux: March 2026 Family Court Bundle Changes Primer
The President has promulgated a revised PD 27A which will come into force on 2 March 2026, designed to modernise the law and embed best practice into one chaptered Practice Direction. This article sets out the key changes practitioners and litigants should be aware of in family proceedings.
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.