Needs
-
Mainwaring v Bailey [2024] EWHC 2296 (Fam)28 August 2024
Henke J. The husband unsuccessfully appealed against an order leaving him with c.35% of the assets in a ‘small money’ case. Ms Justice Henke emphasised the breadth of the trial judge’s discretion and affirmed that fairness does not always mean equality.
- Cases
- Sharing Principle
- Housing Need
- Loans
- Appeals
- Debts
- Needs
-
RN v TT [2024] EWFC 264 (B)14 June 2024
HHJ Hess. W (51) and H (49) cohabited in a flat in W’s sole name from late 2003 and married in 2004. W was a GP. H was a former painter and decorator.
- Cases
- Pensions on Divorce
- Delay
- Needs
What Is a ‘Predicament of Real Need’?
In Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2010] 2 FLR 1900 at [81] Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers said that of the three strands identified in White v White [2000] 2 FLR 981 and Miller/McFarlane [2006] 1 FLR 1186 it was needs and compensation which could most readily render it unfair to hold the parties to an ante-nuptial agreement. But what is the meaning of ‘predicament of real need’?
- Blog
- Pre-Nuptial Agreements
- Needs
!16/07/2024 14:38
Impact of Conduct on Needs
In exercising its powers in financial remedy proceedings, the court is required to have regard to the ‘conduct of each of the parties if that conduct is such that it would in the opinion of the court be inequitable to disregard it’: s 25(2)(g) Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.
- Journal
- Conduct
- Needs
!01/07/2024 07:00
AT v BT: The Return of Compensation
In AT v BT [2023] EWHC 3531 Francis J considered what he described (at [4]) as ‘the proper approach of the court to the sharing principle and to the principle of compensation’ given that ‘the husband maintains that this is a pure needs case and the wife asserts that this is a full sharing case’. This led H to offer a lump sum of £3.545m and W to seek a lump sum of £9.145m (with W to retain a property with an agreed value of £195,000 (£190,000 net of notional costs of sale)).
- Blog
- Compensation
- Assets
- Needs
!20/06/2024 19:41
-
AH v BH [2024] EWFC 1257 June 2024
Peel J final hearing judgment in high-net-worth FR case in which the parties had entered into a pre-nuptial agreement which purported to ‘severely limit W’s financial remedy claims in her own right and the financial needs of W and the children’.
- Cases
- Spousal Maintenance (Quantum)
- Agreements
- Needs
-
TW v GC [2024] EWHC 949 (Fam)21 February 2024
This was an appeal of a final order in financial remedy proceedings heard by Mr Justice Cusworth. The appeal argued that HHJ Furness KC at first instance had pitched W’s needs at too high a level, applied needs to capital but sharing to pensions, and included interest on a lump sum while H was also paying maintenance. Appeal allowed on issue of pensions and interest only.
- Cases
- Sharing Principle
- Pensions on Divorce
- Interest
- Duxbury Capitalisation
- Needs
-
The Incorporated Trustees of Great Calling Ministries Worldwide v (1) A Irabor (2) F Irabor [2024] EWHC 803 (Fam)11 April 2024
Sir Jonathan Cohen. Appeal by an intervener against a final order which included discharging an interim charging order on the FMH made in the intervenor’s favour and a payment of a lump sum which would prevent the recovery of the monies the intervenor alleged were owed to them.
- Cases
- Loans
- Joinder of Third Parties
- Debts
- Needs
The Having of Children ‘Changes Everything’ – But in What Way?
How (if at all) should future non-financial contributions yet to be made by one of the parties to a marriage or civil partnership be taken into account when calculating the quantum of periodical payments?
- Blog
- Periodical Payments
- Needs
!07/05/2024 12:35
-
Xanthopoulos v Rakshina [2024] EWCA Civ 848 February 2024
King, Bean and Moylan LJJ. Epic saga of litigation concludes with the Court of Appeal substituting a final order made in Part III proceedings.
- Cases
- Part III
- Housing Need
- Conduct
- Costs
- Appeals
- Needs
©2023 Class Legal classlegal.com
