
In a previous post Nicholas Allen KC considered the potential impact of Waggott v Waggott [2018] 2 FLR 406 on the argument that income (or the assets or capital generated therefrom) earned in or referable to the first 12 months post-separation should be classed as matrimonial property to which the sharing principle applies. This issue has now been revisited in OS v DT [2025] EWFC 156 (B) per HHJ Hess.
!08/07/2025 07:00
HHJ Vincent. A Pakistani divorce was deemed to be valid in the UK on public policy grounds and permission was granted for the wife to bring financial remedies proceedings in this jurisdiction.This hearing concerned the wife’s application under s 13…
Lord Burrows and Lord Stephens (with whom Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lady Simler agree). The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed W’s appeal, upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision, and clarified application of the sharing principle and matrimonialisation.
Edwin Johnson J. TLATA judgment setting out the circumstances in which a new claim can be pursued on appeal, the law regarding the ‘release’ of one’s beneficial interest in property to another joint tenant, and the differences between re…
The Spring 2025 issue of this journal led off with the eagerly awaited, 21-page Final Report of the Duxbury Working Party. As one would expect from its distinguished authors, the report is engaging, well written and skilfully argued, but Peter Duckworth here explains his reasons for thinking that its conclusion – that we need to go on using the Duxbury model – is wrong.
!30/06/2025 06:00
message