DJ Phillips. Final hearing where the issues concerned whether a post-nuptial agreement was binding on the parties and fair. The parties were married for 9 years and had one child, 10, and, W’s older child, 19, who was treated as a child of the family, having been 6 years when the parties met. Four days after the marriage, the parties signed a PNA.
Every family lawyer knows that the validity of pre-nuptial agreements (pre-nups) is at the mercy of the judge’s discretion, yet a freely entered agreement that is not unfair will be given decisive weight.
!01/07/2024 07:00
As helpfully summarised by Calum Smith on the FRJ website Mostyn J’s judgment in James v Seymour [2023] EWHC 844 (Fam) 675 included a renewed attempt to tackle how Child Maintenance should be calculated, effectively refining the methodology first se…
!29/05/2023 08:00
A provisional version of this report was published on 2 October 2024 and invited representations for consideration by the Working Party ahead of publication of this final report. Such representations as were received are summarised in Appendix 6, and in a few instances in alterations to the text of the report. The main recommendations of the Working Party have not changed following consideration of those representations. The figures in the illustrative tables in Appendix 5 have been revised to reflect increases in the rate of Capital Gains Tax announced and implemented in the October 2024 budget.
!25/11/2024 16:07
The duty of disclosure and its proactive nature runs through financial remedy proceedings like letters through a stick of seaside rock. It appears on the face of the Form E. It has been set out in numerous cases.
!19/12/2024 11:39
message