Housing Need

D v D [2024] EWFC 76

Judgment date: 12 March 2024 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2024/76 HHJ Booth, sitting as a judge of the High Court: 25:75 division in favour of H following breakdown of second marriage and H’s substantial assets. Court considered W’s needs should be generously interpreted to

A Mother v A Father (Re Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989) [2024] EWFC 63

Judgment date: 19 February 2024 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2024/63.html HHJ Vincent. Schedule 1 matter determined in light of the child’s needs and the strict remit of Schedule 1, notwithstanding the significant disparity between the parents’ respective economic positions and standards of living.

SP v QR [2024] EWFC 57 (B)

Judgment date: 12 March 2024 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2024/57.html HHJ Hess. Schedule 1 application with a ‘more modest’ asset base regarding residence in a property subject to a mortgage and ‘top-up’ maintenance for a disabled child. Background The applicant mother was 37 years

BL v OR [2023] EWFC 229 (Fam)

Judgment date: 07 December 2023 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2023/229.html Sir Jonathan Cohen. Final hearing involving a prenuptial agreement in circumstances where W had transferred her property, which amounted to W parting with the bulk of her assets. H was a wealthy man, and

LMZ v AMZ [2024] EWFC 28

Judgment date: 12 February 2024 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2024/28 Moor J. A striking age difference, 48 years between the parties, gives rise to a strong needs-based claim. Background * Both parties were born in Iraq and married in September 1999. At that time, H was 68 and

JN v GN [2023] EWFC 244

Judgment date: 21 November 2023 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2023/244.html DJ Hatvany. The parties were married for 23 years, having separated in 2013. W was 60 and H was 62. They had one adult child. W continued to reside in the family home following

Butler v Butler [2023] EWHC 2453 (Fam)

Judgment date: 24 August 2023 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/fam/2023/2453 Moor J. Does judge have to satisfy both parties’ needs in a needs case? Appeal in modest asset case where first instance order did not meet W’s needs. H (64) and W (53). 6 year