Mon06262017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Lottie Tyler reviews how an adult child’s conduct can affect a claim brought under the Inheritance Act (Provision for Family and Dependants) 1975

The successful claims brought by independent, adult children under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975) can provoke strong reactions. It can be argued that a person should be free to leave their estate to whomever they choose, and if they have taken the time to make a will setting out their wishes it is unfair for those wishes to be undermined. Claims from independent, adult children under I(PFD)A 1975 attract further controversy as the applicant will not generally be in the position of losing an income or a home as a result of being excluded from the will, as is the case for an applicant who was financially dependent on the deceased. Equally, if an adult child was estranged from, or had an acrimonious relationship with, the deceased parent, it is objectively difficult to understand their sense of entitlement to a share of the estate. But, to quote Niccolo Machiavelli, sometimes it may be the case that:

Lara Myers highlights the implications of Brexit and the potential impact on jurisdiction issues in family proceedings

Given the increasingly international nature of families, the implications of the leave vote in the EU referendum in June 2016 are particularly relevant within the realms of family law. This article examines the potential impact of the UK’s decision to leave the EU on issuing divorce proceedings, child abduction and maintenance enforcement.

Rachel Nicholl revisits the impact of Vince v Wyatt and guidance on applications to strike out in family proceedings

An application to strike out a statement of case remains rare in family proceedings. Such applications are far more common and widely used in civil cases under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998). The family courts have the power to strike out a statement of case pursuant to r4.4, Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010). When the FPR 2010 came into force on 6 April 2011, this was just one of the new case management powers adopted from the CPR 1998. This article will address the key provisions of the FPR 2010 as to strike out applications, what to consider when making an application under r4.4, FPR 2010, and case law examples of how the family courts have approached their powers of strike out.

Rebecca Stone looks at the implications of bankruptcy both prior to and following a financial agreement or order

The ramifications of the outcome of the EU referendum on the 23 June 2016 for family law remain unknown. However, with concerns that there may be another economic crisis very much on the radar, it is perhaps a good time to review the difficulties that people face if their spouse goes bankrupt either before or after a financial agreement has been reached.

Fiona Turner considers whether inherited wealth is more likely to result in a departure from equality than earned wealth

Parties on divorce usually have a strong claim to share in the matrimonial property that has been built up during their marriage. Since the House of Lords decision in White v White [2000] it has been recognised that, in some cases, a party may have a weaker or restricted claim to share in ‘non-matrimonial’ property.

Josh Green provides a refresher on why, when and how an application should be made for maintenance pending suit

This article sets out the practical considerations that family lawyers should take into account when making an application for maintenance pending suit (MPS). When instructed by a financially weaker party who faces uncertainty and inadequacy by way of financial provision until a final settlement is reached, family lawyers are confronted with a difficult decision. At what stage is it correct to seek the court’s intervention, if at all? How will the court deal with such applications? Of course similar challenges are faced by practitioners acting for the potential respondent to an application who will not, or indeed can not, provide the interim provision sought by their spouse. This article will provide some guidance for this situation.

Susan Reed asks whether the lessons of the Cleveland inquiry have still not been learned

Towards the conclusion of his judgment in AS v TH [2016], MacDonald J said (at para 233):

Lottie Tyler focuses on the potential impact of the Brexit vote on international child relocation

Speculation regarding the impact on day-to-day life of leaving the EU has scarcely abated since the vote on 23 June. We have seen reports that institutions and companies that have to date based their European headquarters in London may opt to relocate a proportion of their workforces to other European cities. In terms of social ramifications, the media has reported incidents of racism/xenophobia attributed (fairly or not) to the outcome of the vote.