Norris v Norris [2002] EWHC 2996 (Fam)

Judgment date: 28 November 2002

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2002/2996.html

Related

KMR v AER [2026] EWFC 10 (B)

DDJ Benjamin Rose. Judgment considering high-value assets, non-disclosure, jurisdictional questions, issues surrounding the validity of a nuptial settlement and general conduct of proceedings.

All Change or More of the Same? Housing Needs and Notional Property Down Under in light of Amendments to the Family Law Act 1975

[2026] 1 FRJ 55. Considering two aspects of the 2025 amendments to the Australian Family Law Act 1975: the greater recognition given to the needs of a party who has the care of a child to provide housing, and the removal of notional property or addbacks in the balance sheet in property division.

BY v GC (No 2) [2025] EWFC 397

In this seven-day final hearing of a long marriage with adult children, the computation and distribution of a variety of assets were determined by a robust analysis and application of the case law by Mr Nicholas Allen KC.

Read the journal

Related

KMR v AER [2026] EWFC 10 (B)

DDJ Benjamin Rose. Judgment considering high-value assets, non-disclosure, jurisdictional questions, issues surrounding the validity of a nuptial settlement and general conduct of proceedings.

All Change or More of the Same? Housing Needs and Notional Property Down Under in light of Amendments to the Family Law Act 1975

[2026] 1 FRJ 55. Considering two aspects of the 2025 amendments to the Australian Family Law Act 1975: the greater recognition given to the needs of a party who has the care of a child to provide housing, and the removal of notional property or addbacks in the balance sheet in property division.

BY v GC (No 2) [2025] EWFC 397

In this seven-day final hearing of a long marriage with adult children, the computation and distribution of a variety of assets were determined by a robust analysis and application of the case law by Mr Nicholas Allen KC.

Latest

The Curious Case of CA 1989 Schedule 1 paragraph 2(3)

The Curious Case of CA 1989 Schedule 1 paragraph 2(3)

Paragraph 1 of CA 1989 Schedule 1 is headed ‘Orders for financial relief against parents’. Paragraph 2 is headed ‘Orders for financial relief for persons over eighteen’. As recent cases have demonstrated this structure causes complications.

The 2026 FRC Guide: What Practitioners Need to Know

The 2026 FRC Guide: What Practitioners Need to Know

Watch the recording of ‘The 2026 FRC Guide: What Practitioners Need to Know’, first broadcast on Wednesday 6th May 2026 with the authors of the new FRC Guide - HHJ Edward Hess, Nicholas Allen KC, Michael Allum, Lily Mottahedan and Rhys Taylor

Mazur in the Court of Appeal: the Judgment That Saved Half the Profession from Accidental Criminality

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.

is curated by

The Leaders In Family Law Books & Software

EXPLORE OUR PRODUCTS