The online information & webinar resource for private family lawyers.
New to watch
Coronavirus & its impact on Family Law so far (Part 1: Finance)
Video | Security & Lump Sums in Financial Remedies - Zak Virgin, Mills & Reeve
'Tax issues with overseas assets or income in divorce' - Sofia Thomas
When ignorance isn’t bliss: Practical Tips on Avoiding Negligence Claims
New to read
-
Coronavirus & its impact on Family Law so far (Part 1: Finance)
Recording of live webinar, first broadcast on Wednesday 1st April 2020. Webcast, 02/04/2020, free -
Latest Family Court statistics show a decrease in number of cases started in Family Courts by 1%
Figures from October to December 2019 released. News, 26/03/2020, free -
Coronavirus Guidance:Compliance with Family Court Child Arrangement Orders
Guidance issued by The Rt. Hon. Sir Andrew McFarlane News, 25/03/2020, free -
The Remote Access Family Court: COVID-19 (coronavirus)
Document issued by Mr Justice MacDonald News, 23/03/2020, free -
MS v FS (No.2: Costs and Ancillary Issues) [2020] EWFC B8
The husband had sought to set aside a decree absolute and a financial consent order in proceedings involving what was described as "frankly shambolic and unacceptable case preparation", leading to the loss of a full court day and the case being part-heard. The starting point as to costs was set out in FPR 2010 rule 28.1: the court may make any order as to costs "as it thinks just". As a set-aside application this was not within the definition of "financial remedy proceedings" and so rule 28.2 applied rather than rule 28.3. Mr Recorder Allen QC decided that the wife should pay 80% of the husband's costs, and costs were to be assessed on the indemnity basis. Her conduct in dishonestly obtaining a decree of divorce and a financial order had taken the circumstances of this case out of the norm. Judgment, 19/03/2020, free -
MS v FS [2020] EWFC B9
The husband alleged fraud and sought to set aside a decree absolute and a financial consent order, both from 2011, in proceedings involving what was described as "frankly shambolic and unacceptable case preparation", leading to the loss of a full court day. Mr Recorder Allen QC found as a fact that the husband had been unaware of the divorce and financial proceedings instigated by the wife. Although Mr Recorder Allen QC had made a finding of fraud, the divorce petition was voidable rather than void, and he declined to set it aside in this case. The financial consent order was set aside and the matter would be listed for a new directions hearing. Judgment, 19/03/2020, free -
Webinar: The Secret family Court: Fact or Fiction?
Webinar to be broadcast on Thursday 26th March, 4pm-5pm. News, 19/03/2020, free -
Re T (Parental Alienation) [2019] EWHC 3854 (Fam)
The five-year-old daughter had always lived with her mother, but had been the subject of legal proceedings between her parents for most of her life. All other avenues to engage and promote a good and loving relationship with the father having failed, he was now seeking an order that he should be the child's primary carer and that she should live with him. This application was supported by the child's Guardian. After hearing evidence regarding the consequences of the child being denied a relationship with the father, the mother ceased to actively oppose the father's application. Agreed findings were made that the daughter's relationship with the father had not been consistently promoted by the mother, that the mother was not in a position to promote a positive relationship between the daughter and the father, and that the mother had alienated the daughter from her father. HHJ Raeside (sitting as a judge of the High Court) made further findings including that the father would be better able to promote a relationship between the daughter and the mother. The child's welfare was best met by a transfer of care to her father, as well as an immediate change of school. Judgment, 17/03/2020, free
