Jardaneh v Jardaneh [2022] EWFC 20128 September 2022

HHJ Evans-Gordon. Application by W, by way of judgment summons, for the committal of H to prison for failure to make payments ordered under family law orders.

• Cases

• Committal Applications and Judgment Summonses
• Legal Services Payment Orders
• Costs
• Enforcement

• Stephanie Coker

DH v RH [2023] EWFC 1115 July 2023

MacDonald J. Determination of the W’s application for a legal services payment order (LSPO) and maintenance pending suit (MPS).The parties were both in their 50s and had married in 1995. They have two daughters, born in 2005 and 2007. The H had prod…

• Cases

• Maintenance Pending Suit
• Legal Services Payment Orders

• Rebekah Batt

DH v RH

In their recent article for the Financial Remedies Journal, ‘Living under an LSPO’, Amy Scollan and Henry Hood explored the many challenges of those operating under a Legal Services Payment Order and the need for Court of Appeal guidance. The recent judgment in DH v RH [2023] EWFC 111 creates further cause for concern.

• Blog

• Legal Services Payment Orders

• Henry Hood

!21/08/2023 08:08

Living under an LSPO

Life in receipt of an LSPO is no bed of roses. This article reflects on this aspect in the context of the developing jurisprudence on such orders and to anticipate developments that might be required to make them manageable.

• Journal

• Legal Services Payment Orders

• Henry Hood
• Amy Scollan

!05/06/2023 09:00

Xanthopoulos v Rakshina [2023] EWFC 504 April 2023

Sir Jonathan Cohen. The latest and, one hopes, final episode in a legal saga involving financial remedy, jurisdiction and children litigation spaning 60 hearings between Russia and England, in which H alone had sought counsel and legal advice from 7 firms…

• Cases

• Companies
• Legal Services Payment Orders
• Conduct
• Professional Ethics
• Costs
• Overseas Divorce and the 1984 Act

• Calum Smith

Xanthopoulos v Rakshina [2022] EWFC 3012 April 2022

Mostyn J.Comprehensive survey of law on anonymisation of judgments; [74]–[142]. Correct question is 'Why is it in the public interest that the parties should be anonymous?' rather than 'Why is it in the public interest that the parties should be named?'…

• Cases

• Publicity and Confidentiality
• Overseas Divorce and the 1984 Act
• Release from Undertakings
• Legal Services Payment Orders
• Costs

• Polly Morgan | Case Editor

MG v GM [2022] EWFC 81 March 2022

MPS and LSPO application by W in a case described by Peel J as 'a battle royale' ([3]). Each party denied holding liquid assets, and asserted the other had access to significant wealth. Peel J decided that in these circumstances he must be circumspect. It…

• Cases

• Legal Services Payment Orders
• Maintenance Pending Suit
• Interim Relief

• Alexandra Hampton | Assistant Case Editor

CW v CH (MFPA 1984 Part III: Interim Applications) [2022] EWFC B110 January 2022

Rec. AllenWife’s application under MFPA 1984 Part III for interim periodical payments and a costs allowance for legal fees. Dispute as to whether W had valid claim, to be addressed at substantive hearing, did not preclude interim award. H could afford to…

• Cases

• Legal Services Payment Orders
• Overseas Divorce and the 1984 Act
• Costs
• Maintenance Pending Suit

• Polly Morgan | Case Editor