Lewis v Warner [2017] EWCA Civ 2182
Judgment date: 19 December 2017
Related
Armstrong v Armstrong & Anor (Re Remedy) [2025] EWHC 2054 (Ch)
Mr Andrew Sutcliffe KC sitting as a High Court judge. Judgment considering the appropriate remedy for a claimant who had proved his proprietary estoppel claim and his alternative claim for entitlement under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) 1975 Act.
Klein v Cripps Trust Corporation [2025] EWHC 688 (Fam)
Williams J. Judgment to determine reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 for the spouse and son of the deceased following limited provision for them in the Will and mismanagement of the Will by the executrix.
Bad Behaviour and Broken Bonds: A Comparison of Conduct in 1973 and 1975 Act Claims
Introduction
Fifty years ago, the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (1975 Act) was enacted in an expansion of the court’s statutory powers for financial provision on death.[[1]] Two years earlier, Parliament had enacted the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) to alter the court’s
Related
Armstrong v Armstrong & Anor (Re Remedy) [2025] EWHC 2054 (Ch)
Mr Andrew Sutcliffe KC sitting as a High Court judge. Judgment considering the appropriate remedy for a claimant who had proved his proprietary estoppel claim and his alternative claim for entitlement under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) 1975 Act.
Klein v Cripps Trust Corporation [2025] EWHC 688 (Fam)
Williams J. Judgment to determine reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 for the spouse and son of the deceased following limited provision for them in the Will and mismanagement of the Will by the executrix.
Bad Behaviour and Broken Bonds: A Comparison of Conduct in 1973 and 1975 Act Claims
Introduction
Fifty years ago, the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (1975 Act) was enacted in an expansion of the court’s statutory powers for financial provision on death.[[1]] Two years earlier, Parliament had enacted the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) to alter the court’s
Latest
Mazur in the Court of Appeal: the Judgment That Saved Half the Profession from Accidental Criminality
The Court of Appeal rewrites the landscape of ‘conduct of litigation’ – Mazur & Stuart v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP & Ors [2026] EWCA Civ 369.
Portals: Bringing It All Together
Tips and tricks on using the digital court portals from a member of the stakeholder group for the profession, including how to avoid the double login, when to denote documents as confidential, and how to prompt a response from the court.
FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked
Is it a shield to non-disclosure by one party during financial remedy proceedings if the other party could (and perhaps should) have asked? The duty on parties to give full and frank financial disclosure is not merely a private obligation between them; it is a duty to the court.