Latest updates
- Judgment concerning whether documents leaked to a judge by a possible whistleblower working for a firm in financial remedy proceedings are protected by legal professional privilege. Holman J directed that the matter be listed before The President for determination. Judgment, 27/06/2018, free
- Appeal by a solicitor against an order requiring him to give evidence in big money financial remedy proceedings on the grounds that he was protected by legal professional privilege. Appeal dismissed largely because the evidence sought was not about client advice but third party dealings and therefore not privileged. Judgment, 27/02/2018, free
- The husband was applying for an order that the wife's solicitor, Raymond Tooth, be debarred from acting for her in these proceedings. The application arose out of the fact that following initial contact between the wife's and the husband's solicitors, the husband raised the point that Mr Tooth was one of six solicitors his representative had consulted in November 2015 with a view to, he says, choosing which firm would be a good fit for him were family litigation to occur in London. When that litigation was in prospect, in February 2017, and it transpired that the wife had instructed Sears Tooth, he objected on the basis that Mr Tooth was privy to confidential and privileged information which was such as to conflict him from acting for the wife. The application was dismissed. Judgment, 20/11/2017, free
- The court ruled that all dispositions of a £90 million Modern Art Collection and the financial assets of a limited company to two financial organisations should be set aside because they formed part of the latest scheme by the husband to hide his assets. This meant that at all material times those assets vested in the husband and continue to do so and therefore remain immediately available for the enforcement of the financial remedy order in favour of the wife. Judgment, 12/05/2017, free
- The husband was claiming legal professional privilege such that his solicitor, who had arranged the insurance for a £90 million Modern Art Collection which was ordered to be transferred to the wife, could not be questioned about this matter or about the assets held in a limited company in financial remedy proceedings. The court ruled that there was iniquity such as to justify the lifting of legal professional privilege in this case. Judgment, 12/05/2017, free
Latest know-how
- In a tweet: Whistleblower deliberately sends privileged documents to the court. What next? Case note, 06/08/2018, members only
- Practice Note reproduced from the Dictionary of Financial Remedies 2018. See more here: https://classlegal.com/books/dictionary-of-financial-remedies Practice note, 01/05/2018, members only
- In a tweet: Solicitor ordered to attend court to give evidence regarding location of client's assets Case note, 11/04/2018, members only
- In a tweet: Beauty parade does not debar solicitor from acting where no confidential material disclosed Case note, 19/01/2018, members only
- In a tweet: A 50:50 split in a big money sees W take over £350million Case note, 12/06/2017, members only
Latest training
- 10 questions on the webinar presented by Joe Switalski on 3 October 2017. CPD course, 06/10/2017, members only
- Webinar recorded on 3 October 2017 Webcast, 06/10/2017, members only
Documentation
Using the Hub
Searching
Notices
T&Cs
Privacy
Legal Materials Copyright Statement & Disclaimer
Find out More
What's on the Hub
What's included in your membership
About Us
Contact Us
Stay up to date
Read about our free email alerts
Sign up here
Share