Latest

Multiplied Propagation

Multiplied Propagation

‘An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does the truth become error because nobody will see it.’ (Mahatma Gandhi) In the six months between 30 September 2023 and 1 April 2024, 24 financial remedy judgments which were not mainly about the maintenance of children (and

ES v SS [No.2] [2024] EWFC 59

Judgment date: 18 March 2024 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2024/59.html Sir Jonathan Cohen: determination as to the distribution of trust assets following a final hearing. In October 2023, the court handed down a substantive judgment in the parties’ financial remedies proceedings. The effect of

Single and Joint: Peel J Discusses Expert Evidence in BR v BR [2024] EWFC 11

Single and Joint: Peel J Discusses Expert Evidence in BR v BR [2024] EWFC 11

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2024/11.html Disclaimer: Amelia Alston and Alex Laing represent (with Simon Bruce, Sarah Jane Lenihan and Isabela Maculan of Dawson Cornwell and Richard Todd KC of 1 Hare Court Chambers) the applicant wife in BR v BR [2024] EWFC 11. In

Quantifying Periodical Payments by Reference to the Needs Principle: Surveying the Wood Not the Trees

Quantifying Periodical Payments by Reference to the Needs Principle: Surveying the Wood Not the Trees

Tensions between competing propositions in financial remedy cases are not unusual. For example in Re P (Child: Financial Provision) [2003] 2 FLR 865 Thorpe LJ at [48] referred in the context of CA 1989 Schedule 1 to: ‘an inevitable tension between the two propositions, both correct in law, first that

Julie Annette Merryman v Alex Raymond Merryman & Ors [2024] EWFC 58 (B)

Judgment date: 14 March 2024 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/b/2024/58 HHJ Baddeley. Four stepchildren intervene successfully in financial remedies case in respect of four farming properties. The judgment disposes of an application made by four children (‘the children’) to intervene in financial remedies proceedings between their

AS v RS and Part III Applications

AS v RS and Part III Applications

Applications for permission to bring proceedings pursuant to Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (‘Part III’) have been something of a hot topic lately, following the handing down of the Supreme Court’s decision in Potanina (Respondent) v Potanin (Applicant) [2024] UKSC 3. In that case,

Williams v Williams [2023] EWHC 2479 (Fam)

Judgment date: 28 February 2024 https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/committal-for-contempt-of-court-abigail-laura-williams-v-andrew-john-williams/ Moor J: H held in contempt for failing to comply with orders; sentenced to 56 days’ imprisonment, suspended for 28 days, to allow filing of sworn Form E. Background H is exceptionally wealthy with assets held overseas of more