This category can only be viewed by members.
In the first of a two-part analysis Hannah Minty and Sally Nash compare the differences in practice between financial provision in England and Wales and in Scotland ‘Scottish courts do not regard themselves as having an overriding jurisdiction in dealing with financial provision upon divorce and any agreement reached between the parties.’ In recent months …
Continue reading "International Focus: Across the border"
This post is only available to members.
Richard Shepherd looks at cases in which confiscation orders compete with financial provision claims ‘When assessing an entitlement to property for the purposes of confiscation, the ordinary and familiar common law principles of ownership and “interest” should apply.’ I must confess that I like the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) and the law …
Continue reading "Proceeds Of Crime Act 2002: Dual interests"
This post is only available to members.
Claire Reid considers the varying approach of the courts in assessing periodical payments ‘Charles J stated that the core principle was an application of needs, assessed by reference to the standard of living the parties had enjoyed during the marriage.’ While s3 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) grants the power to order …
Continue reading "Periodical Payments: Defining need"
This post is only available to members.
Richard Adams finds that the welfare of the child remains paramount even in cases involving ‘alternative families’ ‘There has been little consensus in the courts as to how to define and treat the various adults involved in the conception and care of children born to “alternative families”.’ Few will have missed the recent coverage in …
Continue reading "Children: Three’s a crowd?"
This post is only available to members.
Lauren Hall looks at recent case law regarding the correct approach to be applied upon an article 13b defence of risk of harm ‘The position after Re E was that a child would be returned if protective measures were sufficient to meet the risk of psychological or physical harm.’ One of the possible defences to …
Continue reading "Child Protection: Subjective reasoning"
This post is only available to members.
Frances Bailey examines criteria for a wasted costs order and best practice when adding a third party ‘The power to make a wasted costs order is a discretionary one and the court exercises that discretion both at the hearing, to show cause as to why a wasted costs order should not be made, and at …
Continue reading "Wasted Costs: Proceed with caution"
This post is only available to members.
Caroline Watson suggests potential solutions where delaying a pension sharing order is desirable ‘Parties will need to balance the benefit of preserving a pension income, and/or ongoing maintenance, against the reduction in their pension incomes upon implementation’ Where a couple want to delay implementation of their pension sharing order, the first question is why? Delaying …
Continue reading "Pensions: Delayed interest"
This post is only available to members.
Claire Glaister highlights the court’s approach to costs in GS v L and issues of conduct ‘Since the change in rules, the courts have been reluctant to depart from the general rule, and many family lawyers and their clients alike feel that this has caused injustice.’ The Family Proceedings (Amendment) Rules 2006 came into force …
Continue reading "Costs: Costly behaviour"
This post is only available to members.
Lucy Marks and Vitaliy Eremin compare and contrast the matrimonial regimes in Russia and England and Wales ‘If a Russian citizen marries outside the Russian Federation in accordance with local laws, the marriage will be recognised as valid in Russia and therefore Russia will have jurisdiction to deal with the divorce, notwithstanding where the parties …
Continue reading "International Focus: Competing interests"
This post is only available to members.
Mark Pawlowski considers some potentially far-reaching implications arising from recent case law on ownership of the family home ‘In the case of a purchase in joint names, the presumption of joint ownership in law and equity prevailed in the absence of contrary intention at the time of purchase or following acquisition of the property.’The Supreme …
Continue reading "Beneficial Ownership: Fair shares"
This post is only available to members.
