Cases

Agreements Efficient Conduct Prospective Inheritance Needs

WC v HC (Financial Remedies Agreement) (Rev1) [2022] EWFC 22

Judgment date: 22 March 2022 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2022/22.html Peel J. W’s financial remedy application resulted in a needs-based award of £7.45m net (c.60%). H was from a very wealthy family, and the parties’ lifestyle had been funded by H’

Costs Children Act 1989 Schedule 1 Applications

Re A (Schedule 1, Overspend, Costs Clawback) [2022] EWFC 21

Judgment date: 21 March 2022 Editor's note: this judgment has been removed from Bailii, possibly because of concerns about jigsaw identification. Recorder Chandler QC. Schedule 1 proceedings in which M sought that F clear all her liabilities and provide additional periodical payments above the agreed £8,000 pcm

Pensions on Divorce Special Measures in Conduct of Hearing Needs

ND v LD (Financial Remedy: Needs) [2022] EWFC B15

Judgment date: 10 March 2022 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2022/B15.html DDJ Arshad. Rare reported DDJ decision in modest asset case. Discusses special measures (including some rather unusual) taken before and during hearing in light of H’s mental health and (notwithstanding his capacity) suicidal

Interim Relief Overseas Divorce and the 1984 Act Case Management First Appointments

E v B (Interim Maintenance Inaccurate Time Estimate) [2021] EWFC B90

Judgment date: 04 November 2021 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2021/90.html Recorder Chandler. W’s application for interim maintenance and costs allowance in proceedings under Part III. Robust assumptions were made about H’s ability to pay, and W was awarded £3,000 pcm interim

Costs

A v R [2021] EWFC B35

Judgment date: 24 June 2021 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2021/B35.html

Interim Relief Maintenance Pending Suit Legal Services Payment Orders

MG v GM [2022] EWFC 8

Judgment date: 01 March 2022 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2022/8.html MPS and LSPO application by W in a case described by Peel J as 'a battle royale' ([3]). Each party denied holding liquid assets, and asserted the other had access to significant