James v Seymour: The Calculator

As helpfully summarised by Calum Smith on the FRJ website Mostyn J’s judgment in James v Seymour [2023] EWHC 844 (Fam) 675 included a renewed attempt to tackle how Child Maintenance should be calculated, effectively refining the methodology first se…

• Blog

• Child Maintenance

• Dom Christophers

!29/05/2023 08:00

HW v WB (Financial Remedies; Treatment of Post-nuptial Agreement) [2024] EWFC 328 (B)5 July 2024

DJ Phillips. Final hearing where the issues concerned whether a post-nuptial agreement was binding on the parties and fair. The parties were married for 9 years and had one child, 10, and, W’s older child, 19, who was treated as a child of the family, having been 6 years when the parties met. Four days after the marriage, the parties signed a PNA.

• Cases

• Housing Need
• Spousal Maintenance (Quantum)
• Agreements
• Child Maintenance
• Needs

• Stephanie Coker

Pre-nuptial Agreements – A Good Route to Autonomy?

Every family lawyer knows that the validity of pre-nuptial agreements (pre-nups) is at the mercy of the judge’s discretion, yet a freely entered agreement that is not unfair will be given decisive weight.

• Journal

• Pre-Nuptial Agreements

• Dr Sharon Thompson

!01/07/2024 07:00

Arbitrating Costs Provision Applications

There have been few seismic changes in family law that reshaped everything. Much as we would love suddenly to have a new landscape for our professional work, most of us can only hope to find small solutions that work for some small corner of one field. However, bit by bit this may all contribute to an evolving and improving climate in which families change and start their new chapters. Here we hope is one more such.

• Blog

• arbitration
• Costs

• Amy Scollan
• Mariko Wilson
• James Pirrie

!05/12/2024 08:00

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