
It’s often the financial remedy cases involving non-family barristers or judges which are the most interesting. There’s something about an outsider’s perspective which can illuminate legal principle and remind us that, per Mostyn J, ‘the Family Courts are not a desert island’.
!21/05/2025 14:00
District Judge Veal. Alleged material non-disclosure, W’s totally without merit application issued in October 2024 after seven rounds of litigation including W’s D50K application, settled by agreement, made when she knew about H’s alleged non-disclosure. W ordered to pay costs on indemnity basis. Warning given regarding the use of websites leading to jigsaw identification and thereby breaching FPR 9.46(3).
Given the announcement of a new Financial Remedies Court reporting pilot, Polly Morgan discusses the process of legal blogging: the rules around accessing the hearing, the practicalities of reporting, the framework for controlling what can be reported, and the drafting of a reporting restriction order.
!13/03/2024 07:00
HHJ Watkins. A substantive application by the father for a child maintenance order under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 (‘Schedule 1’); [12]. Within the application, the main issue concerned the most suitable jurisdiction for child maintenance dispute resolution. There were two jurisdictions involved in the forum conveniens dispute namely England and Wales and California.
On Monday last week, in In N v J [2024] EWFC 184 (15 July 2024), Mr Justice Peel handed down the most recent authority on pleading conduct pursuant to s 25(2)(g) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Those interested in this area have been keen to see whether Mr Justice Peel, as the Lead Judge of the Financial Remedies Court, would move the dial either in terms of procedure, or the application of the substantive law. Like all of Mr Justice Peel’s judgments, it is erudite, comprehensive and concise. It is also timely.
!24/07/2024 10:05
message