Sharland v Sharland [2014] EWCA Civ 95; [2015] UKSC 60 – Page 2 – Law Journals

Trusts: An elaborate charade

Financial remedy case Joy v Joy-Morancho [2015] has valuable pointers for practitioners. Alexandra Hirst and Sofie Hoffman examine the outcome ‘The sensible approach must surely be to continue to tread carefully and advise trustees to be cautious when taking any steps which might render the trust susceptible to an argument that it has been nuptialised …

Continue reading "Trusts: An elaborate charade"

This post is only available to members.

Disclosure: Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide

Toby Hales analyses whether the Supreme Court decisions in Gohil and Sharland will finally cheat-proof family justice ‘While every divorcing or separating couple should be encouraged to settle their finances by agreement, the jurisdiction to make such an agreement into an order lies with the court and the court alone.’ There were more than a …

Continue reading "Disclosure: Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide"

This post is only available to members.

Marital Agreements: Interim measures

Nicky Howarth and Hayley Trim look at whether an application for specific performance is appropriate on an interim agreement ‘Practitioners should be astute to the fact that agreements reached in advance of overall financial remedy claims being settled may well of themselves be contractually enforceable.’Family lawyers will be familiar with the principle that agreements reached …

Continue reading "Marital Agreements: Interim measures"

This post is only available to members.

Law Reform: Something for everyone?

James Brown summarises and comments on the key points in the final report of the Financial Remedies Working Group ‘The Financial Remedies Working Group has recognised that a successful aspect of the pilot scheme at the Central Family Court has been to dispense with a first appointment when both parties agree directions.’The final report of …

Continue reading "Law Reform: Something for everyone?"

This post is only available to members.

Setting Aside: Playing the odds

In the conclusion to a two-part analysis, Frances Bailey and Claire Glaister look at the options when seeking to set aside a consent order ‘To successfully set aside a consent order on the basis of common mistake it must be shown not only that there was a common mistake, but that that mistake was fundamental …

Continue reading "Setting Aside: Playing the odds"

This post is only available to members.

Setting Aside: Half-truths

In the first of a two-part analysis, Claire Glaister and Frances Bailey look at the prospects of success when seeking to set aside an order on the basis of non-disclosure ‘The Court of Appeal stressed that there was no support in any of the authorities for the use of Ladd alone to form a jurisdiction …

Continue reading "Setting Aside: Half-truths"

This post is only available to members.