Maintenance Pending Suit

KV v KV [2024] EWFC 165

Judgment date: 03 July 2024 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2024/165 Peel J. Application by W for (i) Maintenance Pending Suit (MPS) pursuant to s 22 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and (ii) a Legal Services Payment Order (LSPO) pursuant to s 22ZA of the Matrimonial Causes

LI v FT (Maintenance Pending Suit) [2024] EWFC 342 (B)

Judgment date: 19 July 2024 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/b/2024/342 DDJ Harrop. Decision on costs after an MPS application with no clear winner. The court was dismayed by what had been incurred in legal fees contesting the MPS application. W incurred £27,000 in a little

DH v RH (No 2) (Variation of Interim Arrangements) [2023] EWFC 210

Judgment date: 28 November 2023 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2023/210.html MacDonald J. See Rebekah Batt’s summary of W’s earlier LSPO and MPS applications for relevant background: DR v RH [2023] EWFC 111. H’s applications 1. To discharge a freezing order made

HAT v LAT [2023] EWFC 162

Judgment date: 29 September 2023 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2023/162.html Peel J. Application by W for MPS and LSPO where the parties had entered into and implemented a Deed of Separation (‘the Deed’) 30 years ago. The Deed had not been converted into a

DH v RH [2023] EWFC 111

Judgment date: 05 July 2023 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2023/111 MacDonald J. Determination of the W’s application for a legal services payment order (LSPO) and maintenance pending suit (MPS). The parties were both in their 50s and had married in 1995. They have two daughters, born

Collardeau-Fuchs v Fuchs [2022] EWFC 45

Judgment date: 26 April 2022 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2022/45 Mostyn J. W’s application for enforcement of interim maintenance order (maintenance decision summarised here). H had negligently failed to pay wages of staff at the parties’ house in Antibes, such payments being part of the interim

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