X v Y re Z [2020] EWFC 80

Judgment date: 26 November 2020

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2020/80.html

Related

Re A and Z: Service Out; MPS; LSPO [2026] EWFC 64

McKendrick J. Interim hearing addressing an application to set aside a previous order permitting alternative service of the divorce petition out of jurisdiction by email in the US, alongside MPS and LSPO applications.

Re N (A Child) (Financial Provision: Contact Travel Costs) [2026] EWFC 18 (B)

DDJ Vickers. Mother’s application for financial support pursuant to Schedule 1 Children Act 1989. She sought orders for periodical payments including backdated payments. Father sought reimbursement for various child-related expenses he had incurred and to offset that against her claim.

DR v ES & Ors (Further LSPO Application) [2026] EWFC 15

MacDonald J. Hearing of W’s fourth LSPO application in long running financial remedies proceedings. MacDonald J dealt with questions of historic and future costs in circumstances where W had overspent on the budget set by a previous LSPO order.

Read the journal

Related

Re A and Z: Service Out; MPS; LSPO [2026] EWFC 64

McKendrick J. Interim hearing addressing an application to set aside a previous order permitting alternative service of the divorce petition out of jurisdiction by email in the US, alongside MPS and LSPO applications.

Re N (A Child) (Financial Provision: Contact Travel Costs) [2026] EWFC 18 (B)

DDJ Vickers. Mother’s application for financial support pursuant to Schedule 1 Children Act 1989. She sought orders for periodical payments including backdated payments. Father sought reimbursement for various child-related expenses he had incurred and to offset that against her claim.

DR v ES & Ors (Further LSPO Application) [2026] EWFC 15

MacDonald J. Hearing of W’s fourth LSPO application in long running financial remedies proceedings. MacDonald J dealt with questions of historic and future costs in circumstances where W had overspent on the budget set by a previous LSPO order.

Latest

Portals: Bringing It All Together

Portals: Bringing It All Together

Tips and tricks on using the digital court portals from a member of the stakeholder group for the profession, including how to avoid the double login, when to denote documents as confidential, and how to prompt a response from the court.

FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked

FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked

Is it a shield to non-disclosure by one party during financial remedy proceedings if the other party could (and perhaps should) have asked? The duty on parties to give full and frank financial disclosure is not merely a private obligation between them; it is a duty to the court.

The Reluctant Pension Credit Member

The Reluctant Pension Credit Member

[2026] 1 FRJ 39. In the case of AP v TP [2025] EWFC 190 (B) a financial remedy order was made by consent, following an FDR, which included a pension sharing order in W’s favour. Difficulties began when W failed to provide the necessary information to permit the pension share to be implemented.

is curated by

The Leaders In Family Law Books & Software

EXPLORE OUR PRODUCTS