Report of the Duxbury Working Party (final), November 2024

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.

• Blog
• Journal

• Duxbury Capitalisation

• Michael Allum
• Simon Bruce
• Sarah Hoskinson
• Lewis Marks KC
• Sir Nicholas Mostyn
• Joe Rainer
• Mary Waring

!25/11/2024 16:07

The Winds of Change – Case Management and the Financial Remedies Court

Once upon a time, not so long ago, ‘ancillary relief’ was something of a legal backwater. Cases were determined solely by reference to ‘reasonable requirements’. Procedural rules, to the extent they existed, were short and loosely applied. Parties filed narrative affidavits of means and answered requests for further and better particulars.

• Journal

• Procedure
• Financial Remedies

• Alexander Chandler KC

!22/11/2024 06:00

Standish v Standish [2024] EWCA Civ 56723 May 2024

Landmark decision where Court of Appeal reduces W’s award by £20 million. Lord Justice Moylan, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Phillips.

• Cases

• Matrimonial and Non-Matrimonial Property
• Sharing
• Gifts
• Matrimonialisation
• Tax
• Autonomy
• Trusts

• Sophia Paraskeva

LI v FT (Maintenance Pending Suit) [2024] EWFC 342 (B)19 July 2024

DDJ Harrop. Decision on costs after an MPS application with no clear winner. The court was dismayed by what had been incurred in legal fees contesting the MPS application. W incurred £27,000 in a little over a month and H nearly £12,000. The sums could have paid for the disputed holiday nearly twice over or, as the husband points out, met a term’s school fees. The MPS costs were the context of W having already incurred £100,000 in legal fees up to the FDA, and H’s £26,000.

• Cases

• Maintenance Pending Suit
• Costs

• Elizabeth Bowden

Dangers of Applying PSOs Determined Using pre-McCloud CEVs on ‘McCloud compliant’ CEVs

Those working in the Pensions on Divorce arena (whether PODEs, solicitors or scheme administrators) will by now be all too familiar with the McCloud ruling, and how much additional work this has caused for cases involving public sector pension schemes.

• Blog

• Pensions on Divorce

• Rahim Rashid

!21/11/2024 08:55