HHJ Booth. Appeal from a final order in a modest asset case, in which the court was tasked with balancing the needs of a party suffering from a serious disability and the needs of the primary carer of the children of the family.
HHJ Hess. Final hearing involving valuation and matrimonial nature of business.
Peel J. Application by W for (i) Maintenance Pending Suit pursuant to s 22 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and (ii) a Legal Services Payment Order pursuant to s 22ZA of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.
This is a response to the FRJ blog post by Nicholas Allen KC and Philip Tait, ‘Ma v Roux: Can You Strike Out a Set Aside Application?’ (25 September 2024), which posed the question as to whether the court is empowered to strike out an application to set aside a financial remedy order. In that article the authors carefully set out the background to this issue.
!08/01/2025 13:21
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
message