G v C [2020] EWFC B35
Judgment date: 16 July 2020
Related
BC v BC [2025] EWFC 236
Peel J. Save for four specific matters, parties cannot refer to what happened at the pFDR. The Financial Remedies Court – Primary Principles paragraph 8 issued by Mostyn J and HHJ Hess goes too far by saying that the court should be told that offers were made and that an was indication given.
GH v GH – FDRs Are Not to Be Dispensed With
If ever there were any doubts as to the importance of the FDR appointment and the parties’ attendance at one, then Mr Justice Peel has unequivocally put those doubts to rest in his judgment in GH v GH [2024] EWHC 2547 (Fam), published on 3 October 2024. The court’s
DR Corner: Introducing Assent: Combining Arbitration and Private FDRs in a Streamlined Process based on the FPR Directions
Anyone who has tried to arrange a Private Financial Dispute Resolution (pFDR) will be familiar with that sinking feeling when the process is slipping away. It starts with a low-level dispute over the judge, the date or the location of the hearing. Then a seemingly innocuous question about disclosure. A
Read the journal
Financial Remedies Journal – 2026 Issue 1 | Spring
Related
BC v BC [2025] EWFC 236
Peel J. Save for four specific matters, parties cannot refer to what happened at the pFDR. The Financial Remedies Court – Primary Principles paragraph 8 issued by Mostyn J and HHJ Hess goes too far by saying that the court should be told that offers were made and that an was indication given.
GH v GH – FDRs Are Not to Be Dispensed With
If ever there were any doubts as to the importance of the FDR appointment and the parties’ attendance at one, then Mr Justice Peel has unequivocally put those doubts to rest in his judgment in GH v GH [2024] EWHC 2547 (Fam), published on 3 October 2024. The court’s
DR Corner: Introducing Assent: Combining Arbitration and Private FDRs in a Streamlined Process based on the FPR Directions
Anyone who has tried to arrange a Private Financial Dispute Resolution (pFDR) will be familiar with that sinking feeling when the process is slipping away. It starts with a low-level dispute over the judge, the date or the location of the hearing. Then a seemingly innocuous question about disclosure. A
Latest
Portals: Bringing It All Together
Tips and tricks on using the digital court portals from a member of the stakeholder group for the profession, including how to avoid the double login, when to denote documents as confidential, and how to prompt a response from the court.
FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked
Is it a shield to non-disclosure by one party during financial remedy proceedings if the other party could (and perhaps should) have asked? The duty on parties to give full and frank financial disclosure is not merely a private obligation between them; it is a duty to the court.
The Reluctant Pension Credit Member
[2026] 1 FRJ 39. In the case of AP v TP [2025] EWFC 190 (B) a financial remedy order was made by consent, following an FDR, which included a pension sharing order in W’s favour. Difficulties began when W failed to provide the necessary information to permit the pension share to be implemented.