Category: Family

Griffiths v Dawson and Co: FD 1993

The possibility that a pension scheme might fall within the scope of section 24(1)(c) was given judicial recognition.

Judges:

Ewbank J

Citations:

[1993] 2 FLR 315

Statutes:

Attachment of Earnings Act 1971 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Brooks v Brooks HL 29-Jun-1995
A director’s pension scheme could be treated as a post-nuptial marriage settlement where the director was the only scheme member. It was thus a matrimonial asset capable of variation by a court in ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. The court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.655463

Lort-Williams v Lort-Williams: CA 1951

two individuals had taken out a single premium insurance policy on the life of Sir John Rolleston Lort-Williams. The benefits were payable to these trustees as ‘moneys payable under this policy, effected for the benefit of the widow or children or any of them of the assured in such shares and proportions and interest, and generally in such manner as the assured shall by will or deed revocable or irrevocable appoint or have so appointed’. The policy was for the benefit ‘of the widow . . ‘ of the assured in such amounts as he should decide by will or deed.
Held: Sommervell L.J. said: ‘Counsel for the husband admits that the words of s. 25 of the Act of 1950 have been given a wide meaning, but he relies that the interest of the wife was contingent in that (i) she has to survive the husband (ii) she has to survive him as his widow, and (iii) if there were children (the position might be obscure if there were not), she might take no interest at all if he appointed the whole fund to the children. I do not think that is sufficient to take the policy out of the meaning of ‘settlement’ in this section.’
Denning LJ said: ‘The word ‘settlement’ in s. 25 . . is not used in the conveyancing sense. It includes any provision made by a husband for the future benefit of his wife, if it proceeds on the footing of the then existing marriage. It does not cease to be a settlement on her because the provision is, not absolute, but only contingent, nor does it cease to be a settlement on her because it may in its terms also be applicable for the benefit of a wife by a subsequent marriage.’

Judges:

Somervell LJ, Denning LJ

Citations:

[1951] P 395, [1951] 2 All ER 241

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1950 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Ben Hashem v Ali Shayif and Another FD 22-Sep-2008
The court was asked to pierce the veil of incorporation of a company in the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. H had failed to co-operate with the court.
After a comprehensive review of all the authorities, Munby J said: ‘The . .
Cited – Brooks v Brooks HL 29-Jun-1995
A director’s pension scheme could be treated as a post-nuptial marriage settlement where the director was the only scheme member. It was thus a matrimonial asset capable of variation by a court in ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. The court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Insurance, Trusts

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.652158

AR v JR: FD 28 Nov 2018

Application pursuant to rule 4.4(1)(b) of the Family Proceeding Rules 2010 that the wife’s application for financial remedies in this divorce suit be struck out on the basis that it is (a), vexatious, and/or duplicative and/or (b), on the basis there has been prior compromise.

Judges:

Cohen J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3626 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.633275

WM v HM: FC 9 May 2017

Judges:

Mostyn J

Citations:

[2017] EWFC 25

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Re F (Children) CA 9-Jun-2016
Appeal against order made in Hague Convention proceedings.
Munby set out the function of the Court of Appeal: ‘Like any judgment, the judgment of the Deputy Judge has to be read as a whole, and having regard to its context and structure. The . .
Cited – Fage UK Ltd and Another v Chobani UK Ltd and Another CA 28-Jan-2014
Lewison LJ said: ‘Appellate courts have been repeatedly warned, by recent cases at the highest level, not to interfere with findings of fact by trial judges, unless compelled to do so. This applies not only to findings of primary fact, but also to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.584199

K (REMO – Power of Magistrates to Issue Bench Warrant): FC 12 May 2017

Whether magistrates sitting in the Family Court have the power to issue a warrant for the arrest of an alleged maintenance debtor who has failed to obey an order to attend for questioning as to his means.
Held: They did, though in this case personal service of the order had not yet been achieved and the matter was remitted.

Judges:

Peter Jackson J

Citations:

[2017] EWFC 27, [2017] WLR(D) 329

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 31E

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Magistrates

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.584197

JP v CP: Misc 10 Apr 2018

Application by for Ancillary Relief for division of matrimonial assets brought by the Petitioner Wife against the Respondent Husband.

Citations:

[2018] NICty 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.633115

Giggs v Giggs: FD 17 Feb 2017

The parties, both famous, were divorcing. In financial remedy proceedings, they now sought restrictions on the publication of the financial details of the applications.
Held: Granted as to financial details.

Judges:

Cobb J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 822 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.582026

Re C (A Child), (No 2) (Application for Public Interest Immunity): FD 31 Mar 2017

Application of the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) for public interest immunity in an application as to a child thought to be at risk of radicalisation.

Judges:

Pauffley J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 692 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Justice and Security Act 2013

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.582028

HB v A Local Authority and Another: FD 21 Mar 2017

(Wardship – Costs Funding Order) The Court was asked ‘ whether the High Court has power, under its inherent jurisdiction, to make a costs funding order against a local authority requiring it to fund legal advice and representation for a parent in wardship proceedings brought by the local authority where that parent has lawfully been refused legal aid.’
Held: No

Judges:

MacDonald J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 524 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Legal Aid, Local Government

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581089

Alexander Robertson, Merchant In Portsoy v Helen Inglis, Daughter of John Inglis: HL 14 Feb 1787

Marriage by Cohabitation and Acknowledgment. – Circumstances in which the marriage was held complete.
This was a declarator of marriage and adherence, brought by the respondent, Helen Inglis, against the appellant, Alexander Robertson, setting forth that he, Robertson, had in 1769, made his addresses to her,-that he had urged her to be his wife, which, after some solicitation, she agreed to, and soon thereafter he fitted up a house for her,-that she, the pursuer, thereafter became desirous of being formally married by a clergyman, but he told her that this was not necessary, and that they were really man and wife, and that the ceremony would only give publicity to a thing which he wished concealed from his father and mother. That, in order to satisfy her, he wrote out and delivered to her a contract of marriage, which he afterwards abstracted from her repositories,-that, in virtue of these solicitations, and on the faith of these assurances, they cohabited together, and lived and resided in the house above mentioned as man and wife, from the year 1769 to 1783, during which time he behaved himself to her in all respects as a husband would do to his wife, by providing the necessaries of life, and by owning and acknowledging her as such; and she was owned and acknowledged as his wife, by the minister of the parish where he resided, and by the whole neighbourhood. That by the ten letters produced, he acknowledges her as his dear wife, and subscribed himself her affectionate and loving husband. The action was thus founded on three grounds, 1. Promise with subsequent copula. 2. Habit and repute; and, 3. Acknowledgment of marriage. In addition to these facts, the house in which they lived had been bought on her account. She was originally a servant, but, preparatory to marriage, he sent her to board, and for her education. On that event, he had given her an annuity of andpound;50 per annum, in case of his predecease. When latterly he fell off in 1783, and proposed marriage to another female, Miss Brown, and this marriage was to be celebrated by a clergyman, none of the clergymen about the place would perform the ceremony, so public was the repute of their being man and wife; and Miss Brown and he had to get married by acknowledging, and going to bed before two witnesses, taking protest in the hands of a notary. In defence, the marriage was denied, and on proof being allowed, and taken on the import of the proof, the appellant contended that she had failed in establishing any of the three grounds of her action.

Citations:

[1787] UKHL 3 – Paton – 53

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.581014

Agnes Kello v Patrick Taylor: HL 16 Feb 1787

Marriage – Constitution of Do. – Circumstances in which a written acknowledgment of each other as husband and wife, not seriously gone into on the part of the female, but immediately repented of, did not constitute marriage.
At the annual market fair of Skirling, the appellant, Agnes Kello, who was the only daughter of a farmer in Skirling-Miln, became acquainted with the respondent Taylor, who had been a farmer in Birkenshaw. Taylor followed up this accidental meeting, by paying his addresses to her at her mother’s house; he made an impression on her. But her parents inquiring more particularly into his character, were not satisfied. Their daughter was possessed of andpound;2000, and her suitor was on the eve of a second bankruptcy. After eighteen months unsuccessfully soliciting her in marriage, he obtained the following writing signed by

Citations:

[1787] UKHL 3 – Paton – 56

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.581013

SL v MJ: FD 24 Nov 2006

Application of SL, now aged 21 on a petition of nullity in relation to the ceremony of marriage which she underwent with MJ in Tanzania.

Judges:

Macur J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3743 (Fam), [2007] 2 FLR 461, [2007] Fam Law 986

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.581005

Henrietta Sinclair,and Janet Williamson, Formerly Sinclair etc: HL 27 Mar 1789

Marriage Settlement – Relief among Heirs – Res Judicata. – The questions in this case were, 1st, Whether a deed executed by David Sinclair of Southdun in 1716 was to be considered a marriage settlement? 2. Whether it was competent to enter into that question, in respect of it being res judicata, by a decree pronounced between the same parties in 1763? 3. Whether the heir in possession, who is bound to keep down the interest of the debt due on the estate, during his possession, has relief against the other heirs of line taking separate estates? The Court of Session

Citations:

[1789] UKHL 3 – Paton – 113

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580995

J v J: FD 23 Jan 2004

Ancillary relief.

Judges:

Bennett J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 53 (Fam), [2004] 1 FCR 709

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – McFarlane v McFarlane; Parlour v Parlour CA 7-Jul-2004
Appeals were made against orders for periodical payments made against high earning husbands. The argument was that if the case of White had decided that capital should be distributed equally, the same should apply also to income.
Held: The . .
Cited – Sorrell v Sorrell FD 29-Jul-2005
The parties contested ancillary relief on their divorce. The marriage had been very long, and the assets were very substantial. The husband contended that these assets represented an exceptional contribution on his part.
Held: In this case an . .
Cited – M v M (Financial Relief: Substantial Earning Capacity) FD 29-Mar-2004
The parties had been married for 12 years, there were three children, one with special needs, and assets of over 12 million pounds. The court considered the application for ancillary relief. It was substantially agreed that the wife should receive . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.221036

Harrod v Harrod: ChD 30 Jun 1854

The contract of marriage is, in its essence, a consent on the part of a man and woman to cohabit with each other, and with each other only. The religious element does not require anything more of the parties; and therefore it is not essential that all the words of the marriage service to be repeated by the man and woman should be actually said ; but, the ceremonies required by law, such as the publication of banns and the like, being complied with, when the hands of the parties are joined together, and the clergyman pronounces them to be man and wife, if they understand that by that act they have agreed to cohabit together and with no other person, they are married.
Therefore, deaf and dumb persons may marry ; and the presumptions in favour of the validity of such a marriage, and of the capacity of the parties to contract it ; and the onus of proof is upon those who would impeach such a marriage.
Everything is presumed in favour of marriage.
If there be no question of mental capacity, the objectionth at a deaf and dumb person did not understand the nature of the contract of marriage which she had been induced to enter into is an objection on the ground of fraud.
Distinction between unsoundness of mind and mere dullness of intellect.
An issue as to sanity is not directed merely upon a suggestion in an answer, but such suggestion must be supported by evidence occasioning a reasonable doubt as to the sanity.
Evidence of witnesses discredited by the inconsistency therewith of their own previous conduct and acts.

Judges:

Sir W Page Wood VC

Citations:

[1854] EngR 685, (1854) 1 K and J 4, (1854) 69 ER 344

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.293542

Singh v Singh: CA 1 Feb 1971

The wife appealed against refusal of her petition for agility and for the absence of consent. It had been an arranged marriage, and she met H at the altar. She found him repugnant, and refused to consummate the marriage.
Held: Her appeal failed. The situation did not amount to lack of consent, and she had shown no condition making intercourse not possible.
W appealed against rejection of her petition for agility based first on the absence of consent and second for non-consummation. It had been an arranged marriage, and she did not meet H until the day of the marriage. She found him repugnant and refused to consummate the marriage.

Judges:

Davies LJ, Karminski LJ, Megaw LJ

Citations:

[1971] EWCA Civ 10, [1971] 2 All ER 82, [1971] 2 WLR 963, [1971] P 226

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – H v H 1904
W sought a decree of agility for her marriage saying she had not consented.
Held: Karminski J said: ‘It was argued by the Attorney-General that the facts of the present ease cannot be said to prove that the ceremony of marriage was performed . .

Cited by:

Cited – Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another CA 16-Dec-2009
The claimants had made several Star Wars films for which the defendants had designed various props items. The parties disputed ownership of the rights in the designs, and in articular of a stormtrooper helmet. The issues came down to whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.262758

Wells v Wells: CA 1992

The husband had transferred his interest in the former matrimonial home to the wife who had custody of the two children of the family. She remarried six months later. The husband sought to have the order set aside.
Held: Brandon LJ said: ‘In my judgment, the order made by the judge, assuming it to have been appropriate at the time it was made, is no longer so. The only justification I can see for depriving the husband of all his interest in the only capital asset of the spouses was the necessity of providing the roof over the head of the wife and children in the foreseeable future. But for the pressing necessity, I think it is clear that the judge would not have made an order as hard on the husband as she felt obliged to make. Once that necessity had been removed, it seems to me the matter must be reconsidered and an order less hard on the husband made.’

Judges:

Brandon LJ

Citations:

[1992] 2 FLR 66

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Dixon v Marchant CA 24-Jan-2008
The parties had only recently settled their ancillary relief proceedings by consent when the former wife remarried. The former husband sought the setting aside of the order. The wife had denied the relationship. The judge had found the conditions in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.263870

Vasey v Vasey: CA 1985

The wife had deserted her husband. The magistrates reduced her maintenance saying that her behaviour was gross and obvious.
Held: Her appeal was upheld. The magistrates should have first made findings on each element listed in 3(1) and only then balance those factors so as to make an order which was just and reasonable in all the circumstances. The most important function was finding the balance between needs and resources. Only if conduct was exceptional should it weigh in the balance. The court should be reluctant to make judgments about the behaviour of one party without hearing as to the entire conduct of both parties during the marriage.

Citations:

[1985] FLR 596, [1985] 15 Fam Law 158

Statutes:

Domestic Proceedings and Magistrates Courts Act 1978 2 3(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Kyte v Kyte CA 22-Jul-1987
The parties disputed an ancillary relief claim on their divorce. The husband had been suicidally depressed. The wife had committed adultery over a long time and also assisted her husband’s failed suicide. The husband now sought to rely upon her . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Magistrates

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.235270

Hedges v Hedges: CA 1991

The parties were middle aged, without children and the marriage was of short duration. W had worked throughout. H lived in tied accomodation, but had purchased a property as an investment and safeguard if he should lose the tied accomodation. W appealed an order providing periodical payments for 18 months and a small lump sum order.
Held: W’s appeal failed. W’s position had not been reduced as a consequence of the marriage. H’s purchase of the property had been prudent, but should be taken into account. Even so W was not entitled to such a sum by way of periodical payments as would allow her to finance a mortgage long term. The pension prospects of H were too remote to be taken account of.

Citations:

[1991] 1 FLR 196

Statutes:

Matrimonial Cause Act 1973 25 25A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Miller v Miller; M v M (Short Marriage: Clean Break) CA 29-Jul-2005
The parties contested ancillary relief where there had been only a short marriage, but where here were considerable family assets available for division. The wife sought to rely upn the husband’s behaviour to counter any argument as to the shortness . .
Mentioned – Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane HL 24-May-2006
Fairness on Division of Family Capital
The House faced the question of how to achieve fairness in the division of property following a divorce. In the one case there were substantial assets but a short marriage, and in the other a high income, but low capital.
Held: The 1973 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.235280

Primavera v Primavera: CA 1992

The court held that a wife’s disposition of her inheritance from her mother was a circumstances which the Court was required to have regard to when making an Order under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. If one party deliberately divests himself or herself of assets that is an important factor.

Citations:

(1992) 1 FLR 16

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – G v G and Another FdNI 25-Oct-2003
There had been a long but argumentative marriage, and the parties disputed distribution of the assets on an ancillary relief application.
Held: The husband could not claim to discount shareholdings as a minority shareholding where he also . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.235259

Kaur v Singh: CA 20 Oct 1971

Appeal by a wife from a judgment on a petition by the wife, who was a Sikh, for a decree of nullity of marriage on the ground of the alleged wilful refusal by the husband to consummate it.

Judges:

Lord Justice Davies
Lord Justice Karminsky
And
Lord Justice Roskill

Citations:

[1971] EWCA Civ 2, [1972] 1 All ER 292, [1972] 1 WLR 105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.262765

Bater v Bater: CA 1906

The judgment of a divorce court dissolving a marriage is a judgment in rem, conclusively established the new status of the parties to the suit. A decree obtained in a foreign country by false evidence or by collusion in regard to the matrimonial offence relied upon will not on that ground be treated as invalid unless it has been set aside in the foreign court.

Citations:

[1906] P 209

Cited by:

Cited – Callaghan v Hanson-Fox (Andrew) FD 1992
H sought to have set aside a decree absolute obtained on the petition of his now deceased wife on the ground of fraud, in that the petitioner had falsely sworn in her affidavit verifying the petition that the marriage had broken down irretrievably . .
Cited – Rapisarda v Colladon (Irregular Divorces) FC 30-Sep-2014
The court considered applications to set aside some 180 petitions for divorce on the grounds that they appeared to be attempts to pervert the course of justice by wrongfully asserting residence in order to benefit from the UK jurisdiction.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.537236

First National Securities v Hegerty: CA 1984

The husband had forged his wife’s signature on the loan application and on the charge of the house held by himself and his wife as joint tenants. He had left the country, and the plaintiff sought to enforce the charge, and ex parte obtained an order nisi charging the husband’s interest in the house. The wife petitioned for divorce. The bank appealed the master’s refusal to make the charging order absolute, and the High Court upheld the appeal and refused to allow the matter to transfer to the Family Division.
Held: The wife’s appeal failed. The judge had identified and considered the correct issues. The plaintiffs had not delayed their action, and had begun it before the divorce. Stephenson LJ said that the courts should not defeat claims from legitimate creditors by use of a matrimonial jurisdiction, though enforcement of a charging order might be deferred until any application under section 30 of the 1925 Act had been dealt with,

Judges:

Stephenson LJ

Citations:

[1984] 3 WLR 769, [1984] 3 All ER 641, [1985] QB 850, [1984] Fam Law 315

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 30, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.248852

Rapisarda v Colladon (Irregular Divorces): FC 30 Sep 2014

The court considered applications to set aside some 180 petitions for divorce on the grounds that they appeared to be attempts to pervert the course of justice by wrongfully asserting residence in order to benefit from the UK jurisdiction.
Held: It had been asserted that the English court had jurisdiction to entertain the petition in accordance with the Council Regulation on the basis that the petitioner was habitually resident and had been resident in England and Wales. In all but one case there was in fact no reason to think there had been any UK residence. The English court was deceived; the English court was induced by fraud to accept that it had jurisdiction to entertain the petition. It was apparent that an Italian had been offering a service providing UK divorces to Italian nationals.
Petitions not having reached the stage of decree had now been dismissed. The decrees must be set aside as being void for fraud. In each case the underlying petition must be dismissed. This is not a matter of judicial discretion; it is the consequence which follows inexorably as a matter of law from the facts as I have found them. It made no difference if one or other or both of the parties have re-married or even had a child.
Sir James summarised the law: ‘i) perjury without more does not suffice to make a decree absolute void on the ground of fraud;
ii) perjury which goes only to jurisdiction to grant a decree and not to jurisdiction to entertain the petition, likewise does not without more suffice to make a decree absolute void on the ground of fraud;
iii) a decree, whether nisi or absolute, will be void on the ground of fraud if the court has been materially deceived, by perjury, forgery or otherwise, into accepting that it has jurisdiction to entertain the petition;
iv) a decree, whether nisi or absolute, may, depending on the circumstances, be void on the ground of fraud if there has been serious procedural irregularity, for example, if the petitioner has concealed the proceedings from the respondent.’

Judges:

Sir James Munby P FD

Citations:

[2014] EWFC 35, [2015] 1 FLR 597

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973 5(2), Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Family Procedure Rules 2010 7.5(1), Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ali Ebrahim v Ali Ebrahim (Queen’s Proctor intervening) 1983
. .
Cited – Sheldon v Sheldon (The Queen’s Proctor Intervening) 28-Jan-1865
Practice. – Dismissal of Petition – No Evidence produced -The Queen’s Proctor intervened in a suit for dissolution in which the respondent did not appear, and alleged collusion and the petitioner’s adultery. No evidence being tendered in support of . .
Endorsed – Crowden v Crowden (The King’s Proctor showing cause) 1906
The normal practice of the Queen’s Proctor is not to adduce evidence in support of the plea on intervening in a divorce petition, and there is no need for him to do so where there is no answer to the plea. . .
Endorsed – Clutterbuck v Clutterbuck and Reynolds (Queen’s Proctor showing cause) 1961
The court considered the proper practice where the Proctor intervened in a divorce petition, but no answer was received from the parties. . .
Cited – Wiseman v Wiseman 1953
A decree absolute of divorce which would otherwise be void, will still be void even though one of the parties has subsequently remarried and had a child. . .
Cited – Bater v Bater CA 1906
The judgment of a divorce court dissolving a marriage is a judgment in rem, conclusively established the new status of the parties to the suit. A decree obtained in a foreign country by false evidence or by collusion in regard to the matrimonial . .
Cited – Lazarus Estates Ltd v Beasley CA 1956
There was a privative clause in the 1954 Act. A landlord’s declaration under the Act that work of a specified value, supporting an increase in rent, had been carried out on leased premises, could not be questioned after 28 days of its service on the . .
Cited – Callaghan v Hanson-Fox (Andrew) FD 1992
H sought to have set aside a decree absolute obtained on the petition of his now deceased wife on the ground of fraud, in that the petitioner had falsely sworn in her affidavit verifying the petition that the marriage had broken down irretrievably . .
Cited – Moynihan v Moynihan (No 2) FD 1997
The Queen’s Proctor applied to have set aside a decree absolute of divorce obtained by fraud on the part of the petitioner, the by then deceased Lord Moynihan. The particulars set out in the petition were false in a number of material respects; the . .
Cited – S v S (Ancillary Relief: Consent Order) FD 4-Mar-2002
An order for ancillary relief had been made by consent. Later the House of Lords issued a judgment which changed the law which had been the basis of the decision to accept the settlement. The wife now sought to set aside the consent order, and . .
Cited – Marinos v Marinos FD 3-Sep-2007
The court was asked as to points of both law and fact under Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2203, commonly known as Brussels II (revised). The greek father and english mother and their children had lived in Greece and England. W began . .
Cited – Kearly v Kearly FD 2009
. .
Cited – Leake v Goldsmith FD 8-May-2009
. .
Cited – V v V FD 20-May-2011
The court was asked as to its jurisdiction to hear a divorce petition under the Regulation Brussels II Revised. . .
Cited – Tan v Choy CA 19-Mar-2014
This appeal concerns the fifth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of the Regulation, which provides that ‘[i]n matters relating to divorce . . jurisdiction shall lie with the courts of the Member State (a) in whose territory . . the applicant is habitually . .

Cited by:

Cited – Grasso v Naik (Twenty-One Irregular Divorces) FD 8-Nov-2017
Deceit in address avoided divorce petitions
The Queen’s Proctor applied to have set aside as fraudulent 21 petitions for divorce. It was said that false addresses had been used in order to give the court the appearance that it had jurisdiction.
Held: The decrees obtained by fraud were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Jurisdiction, News

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.537216

C (Lay Advocates) (No 2) Secretary State for Justice v A Local Authority and Others: FD 3 Jul 2020

Consequential judgment after dealing with the issue of the funding of lay advocates for parents with intellectual impairments which required them to have professional support to understand the court proceedings and to participate effectively in the same.

Judges:

Keehan J

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1762 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.655269

Hewitson v Hewitson: CA 6 Oct 1994

W (former) had obtained leave ex parte to seek financial relief, and the former H now requested that that leave be set aside. H and W had been divorced in California. W had signed a ante-nuptial agreement. W was now resident here. H argued that England was not the appropriate venue under section 16.
Held: The grant of leave was set aside: ‘it would be wrong in principle and contrary to public policy to extend the narrow compass of an Act designed to meet limited objectives to cover a wider and unintended situation. The facts of this case vividly illustrate my conclusion. A court of competent jurisdiction in California has made a consent order negotiated by lawyers. That order was not appealed nor successfully criticised. It was designed to be comprehensive and final, embodying all the ancillary matters following upon the dissolution of a failed marriage. The former husband complied with the order. It is inconsistent with the comity existing between courts of comparable jurisdiction for an English court to review or seek to supplement the foreign order on the basis of the subsequent relationship of the former spouses. It is all the more so when an applicant in similar circumstances seeking to vary a final order under our matrimonial jurisdiction would by statute be precluded from doing so.’

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

[1994] EWCA Civ 43, [1995] 2 FCR 588, [1995] 1 All ER 472, [1995] 2 WLR 287, [1995] Fam Law 129, [1995] 1 FLR 241, [1995] Fam 100

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 12 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Holmes v Holmes CA 1989
Purchas LJ said: ‘the phrase ‘substantial ground for the making of an application for such an order’ is clearly central to the issues in this application . . [i]n particular when the court comes to consider such an application, it will have to take . .
Cited – Z v Z (Financial Provision: Overseas Divorce) FD 1992
When considering an application for financial relief after an overseas divorce, the court should look at the issues which might arise under section 18 of the 1984 Act if leave were granted. In considering whether there is substantial ground for . .
Cited – M v M (Financial Provision after Foreign Divorce) 1994
. .
Doubted – S v S (Financial Provision: Post-divorce Cohabitation) FD 1994
. .
Cited – Quazi v Quazi HL 1979
The husband had pronounced a talaq in Pakistan, in accordance with the 1961 Muslim Family Ordinance. The question was whether the English court had jurisdiction on the wife’s petition to dissolve the marriage and make consequential orders relating . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.655371

Z v Z (Financial Provision: Overseas Divorce): FD 1992

When considering an application for financial relief after an overseas divorce, the court should look at the issues which might arise under section 18 of the 1984 Act if leave were granted. In considering whether there is substantial ground for making an application the likely outcome of the application, if made, has to be highly relevant.

Judges:

Ewbank J

Citations:

[1992] 2 FLR 291

Statutes:

Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 12 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hewitson v Hewitson CA 6-Oct-1994
W (former) had obtained leave ex parte to seek financial relief, and the former H now requested that that leave be set aside. H and W had been divorced in California. W had signed a ante-nuptial agreement. W was now resident here. H argued that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.655372

S v S (Financial Provision: Post-divorce Cohabitation): FD 1994

Citations:

[1994] 1 FLR 228

Statutes:

Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 12 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Doubted – Hewitson v Hewitson CA 6-Oct-1994
W (former) had obtained leave ex parte to seek financial relief, and the former H now requested that that leave be set aside. H and W had been divorced in California. W had signed a ante-nuptial agreement. W was now resident here. H argued that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.655374

M v M (Financial Provision after Foreign Divorce): 1994

Citations:

[1994] 1 FLR 399

Statutes:

Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 12 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hewitson v Hewitson CA 6-Oct-1994
W (former) had obtained leave ex parte to seek financial relief, and the former H now requested that that leave be set aside. H and W had been divorced in California. W had signed a ante-nuptial agreement. W was now resident here. H argued that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.655373

W v H: FD 2 May 2012

The issues in this case are:-
i) Whether an unopposed decree nisi of divorce on the wife’s petition granted in 2006, based on H’s adultery, and followed by over four years of reconciliation and cohabitation, should now be made absolute, on W’s opposed application;
ii) If it is not, whether the decree should be rescinded;
iii) If the decree nisi is rescinded, whether W should have permission to file a supplemental petition;
iv) Should the petition be dismissed?

Judges:

The Honourable Mrs Justice Parker DBE

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1103 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.463338

Dhillon v Sampuran: FC 4 Dec 2020

Judgment summons to enforce a final financial consent order approved and made in this court

Judges:

Her Honour Judge Gibbons

Citations:

[2020] EWFC B70

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.670997

SK v WL: FD 26 Feb 2010

Wife’s ancillary relief application.

Judges:

Mr Justice Moylan

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3768 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.444734

M v M and Others: FD 14 Aug 2013

Application by the wife for an order for financial relief under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 following her divorce in Russia from her husband.

Judges:

Mrs. Justice Eleanor King DBE

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 2534 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.514462

Miller v Miller; M v M (Short Marriage: Clean Break): CA 29 Jul 2005

The parties contested ancillary relief where there had been only a short marriage, but where here were considerable family assets available for division. The wife sought to rely upn the husband’s behaviour to counter any argument as to the shortness of the marriage. The husband answered to say that she had declared that she would not do this.
Held: ‘Ancillary relief proceedings are quasi-inquisitorial and the judge is never confined by what the parties elect to put in evidence or by whatever they may agree to exclude from evidence. ‘ W argued that ‘as a matter of principle and construction allegations of conduct in ancillary relief could only be advanced under s25(2)(g) and if that sub-section was excluded by agreement or concession then conduct could not be introduced as an aspect of any other of the statutory criteria. Thus it was not open to a party to disavow s25(2)(g) and then contend that the other spouse’s contribution, which s25 (2)(f) requires the court to assess, was valueless or devalued because of attitude or conduct.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Wall and Mrs Justice Black

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 984, [2005] 2 FCR 713, [2005] Fam Law 766, (2005) 102(33) LSG 24

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25(2)(g)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – M v M (Financial Relief: Substantial Earning Capacity) FD 29-Mar-2004
The parties had been married for 12 years, there were three children, one with special needs, and assets of over 12 million pounds. The court considered the application for ancillary relief. It was substantially agreed that the wife should receive . .
Cited – S v S 1976
Ancillary relief in marriage of short duration. . .
Cited – H v H 1981
Ancillary relief – short marriage. . .
Cited – Robertson v Robertson FD 1982
The parties had married in 1973, separated in 1976, and divorce proceedings begun in 1977. W suffered bad health and did not work. H had a position as a senior editor of a newspaper.
Held: The periodical payments order should provide support . .
Cited – Brett v Brett 1969
Ancillary relief where ‘this marriage only lasted a very short time’ . .
Cited – Hedges v Hedges CA 1991
The parties were middle aged, without children and the marriage was of short duration. W had worked throughout. H lived in tied accomodation, but had purchased a property as an investment and safeguard if he should lose the tied accomodation. W . .
Cited – White v White HL 26-Oct-2000
The couple going through the divorce each had substantial farms and wished to continue farming. It had been a long marriage.
Held: Where a division of the assets of a family would satisfy the reasonable needs of either party on an ancillary . .
Cited – H v H (Financial Provision: Conduct) 1994
. .
Cited – G v G (Financial Provision: Separation Agreement) CA 28-Jun-2000
The parties had been married before and had signed a prenuptial agreement.
Held: Thorpe LJ set out the duties of a judge in ancillary relief applications: ‘A judge has to do fairness between the parties, having regard to all the circumstances. . .
Cited – Wells v Wells CA 20-Mar-2002
The court considered an application for ancillary relief. The assets were substantial, but before the judge was to deliver his judgment he accepted evidence from the husand that the sale of his business had fallen through and H’s income . .
Cited – Wachtel v Wachtel CA 8-Feb-1973
The court described the 1969 and 1970 Acts as ‘a reforming statute designed to facilitate the granting of ancillary relief in cases where marriages have been dissolved . . We regard the provisions of sections 2,3, 4 and 5 of the Act of 1970 as . .
Cited – Wells v Wells FD 2001
Where a party alleges that the other has made a nil contribution to the welfare of the family, the case must be advanced under s25(2)(g). . .
Cited – Cordle v Cordle CA 15-Nov-2001
The former practice in ancillary relief applications where a circuit judge hearing an appeal from a district judge could admit new evidence and hear the case de novo should not survive the new rules, and should cease. An appeal to the circuit judge . .
Cited – Foster v Foster CA 16-Apr-2003
The marriage had been short, there were no children, both parties were working, and each could support themselves providing themselves with accomodation. The wife had successfully appealed a finding of the district judge for an equal distribution. . .
Cited – Barder v Barder; Barder v Caluori HL 1988
Later Event no ground to appeal from consent order
The matrimonial home had been owned jointly by the husband and wife. In divorce proceedings, an order was made by consent that the husband should transfer his interest in the home to the wife within 28 days. Before the order had been executed, the . .
Cited – Martin v Martin CA 10-Mar-1977
The court urged caution in a judge using his own experience of the property market by way of judicial notice: ‘[W]herever it is to be argued that the wife could find alternative accommodation for herself out of her share of the equity, whatever that . .
Cited – Piglowska v Piglowski HL 24-Jun-1999
No Presumption of House for both Parties
When looking to the needs of parties in a divorce, there is no presumption that both parties are to be left able to purchase alternative homes. The order of sub-clauses in the Act implies nothing as to their relative importance. Courts should be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Fielden, Graham (Executors of Cunliffe deceased) v Cunliffe CA 6-Dec-2005
The will was executed anticipating the marriage to the respondent, leaving assets on discretionary trusts for the responent and various family members and others. She had come to work for the deceased as his housekeeper, but later they came to . .
Appeal from – Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane HL 24-May-2006
Fairness on Division of Family Capital
The House faced the question of how to achieve fairness in the division of property following a divorce. In the one case there were substantial assets but a short marriage, and in the other a high income, but low capital.
Held: The 1973 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.229092

Holmes v Holmes: CA 1989

Purchas LJ said: ‘the phrase ‘substantial ground for the making of an application for such an order’ is clearly central to the issues in this application . . [i]n particular when the court comes to consider such an application, it will have to take into account under s. 16(1) whether in all the circumstances of the case it will be appropriate for such an order to be made by a court in England and Wales. If it is not satisfied that it would be appropriate (and that is a positive onus), the court shall, as a matter of mandatory instruction, dismiss the application.
In my judgment that section reflects the fundamental rule of comity as between competent courts dealing with matters of this kind. Of course s. 16 is to be considered on the application itself. Mr. Bond very properly drew the distinction between the criteria which the court should take into account if it decides to entertain the application and those which the court has to consider on the application for leave to make the application. Nevertheless, if on the application for leave to apply it is clear that if leave were given the application must founder at the first hurdle of s. 16(1), then it would clearly be wrong for the court to grant leave to apply in the first instance. So it is not possible to isolate the considerations which arise under this group of sections’ and
‘the purpose of this Act is generally apparent, namely, that it is there to remit hardships which have been experienced in the past in the presence of a failure in a foreign jurisdiction to afford appropriate financial relief. The obvious cases are those jurisdictions where there simply are not any provisions to grant financial relief to wives or children or, maybe husbands and children. In such cases, although the dissolution of the marriage has taken place in a foreign jurisdiction according to foreign laws, then the courts in this country are empowered by Parliament to step in and fill the gap. For my part I do not believe that the intention of Parliament in passing this Act was in any way to vest in the English courts any power of review or even correction of orders made in a foreign forum by a competent court in the whole matter had been examined in a way exactly equivalent to the which examination which would have taken place if the application had been made in the first instance in the courts here. That is not the object of this legislation at all’.
There is no opaqueness in the language of s16.
Russell LJ said: ‘Prima facie the order of the foreign court should prevail save in exceptional circumstances . .’

Judges:

Purchas LJ, Russell LJ

Citations:

[1989] Fam 47

Statutes:

Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 13 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Agbaje v Akinnoye-Agbaje SC 10-Mar-2010
The parties had divorced in Nigeria, but the former wife now sought relief in the UK under section 10 of the 194 Act. The wife said that she lived here, but the order made in Nigeria was severely detrimental requiring her either to live here in . .
Cited – Hewitson v Hewitson CA 6-Oct-1994
W (former) had obtained leave ex parte to seek financial relief, and the former H now requested that that leave be set aside. H and W had been divorced in California. W had signed a ante-nuptial agreement. W was now resident here. H argued that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Jurisdiction

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.406671

M v M (Prenuptial Agreement): FD 2002

Connell J discussed the effect of the presence of a prenuptial agreement, saying ‘The prenuptial agreement in my view is relevant to tending to guide the court to a more modest award than might have been made without it. I reject outright the suggestion that it should dictate the wife’s entitlement; but I bear it in mind nevertheless’. It did not matter whether a prenuptial agreement was taken into account under the more specific rubric of s 25(2)(g) of the 1973 UK Act or, more generally, having regard to all the circumstances of the case.

Judges:

Connell J

Citations:

[2002] 1 FLR 654

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.425370

M v M (Financial Relief: Substantial Earning Capacity): FD 29 Mar 2004

The parties had been married for 12 years, there were three children, one with special needs, and assets of over 12 million pounds. The court considered the application for ancillary relief. It was substantially agreed that the wife should receive half of the assets at the date of separation, but she sought a similar proportion of the increase since.
Held: The case of GW was to be preferred to Foley. The wife’s continuing duties of care for the children were to be taken into account. The court acknowledged the significance of the length of the marriage and of the period of cohabitation before the marriage: ‘there ought to be an acknowledgement in the level of award to take account of this factor. I regard this marriage as in the lower end of the bracket of medium to long term, which means that an equal division is not necessarily to be regarded as almost automatic. ‘ As to the budget prepared for the wife: ‘Those who practice in this field know that a budget is a work of art (and sometimes a work of artifice) but the Court must be entitled to take a realistic view. The original budget in this case was very high in the context of previous lifestyle. ‘ The court did not consider the husband’s expected high future earnings to be a marital asset.

Judges:

Baron DBE J

Citations:

[2004] Fam Law 496, [2004] EWHC 688 (Fam), [2004] 2 FLR 236

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Preferred – GW v RW (Financial Provision: Departure from Equality) FD 18-Mar-2003
An entitlement to an equal division must reflect not only the parties’ respective contributions ‘but also an accrual over time’, and it would be ‘fundamentally unfair’ that a party who has made domestic contributions during a marriage of 12 years . .
Cited – Foley v Foley CA 1981
The court considered the effect on a divorce ancillary relief settlement of a period of cohabitation before the marriage. . .
Cited – Lambert v Lambert CA 14-Nov-2002
The parties appealed an order for the division of the family’s 20 million pound fortune on divorce. The husband argued that his special contribution to the creation of the wealth meant that he should receive a greater share.
Held: The Act gave . .
Cited – Cornick v Cornick (No 2) FD 1995
The court considered an application to vary an ancillary relief award and gave a wife more than the sum set out in the budget in circumstances where she had received a capital sum that, with hindsight, was far too low.
Hale J said: ‘Where such . .
Cited – J v J FD 23-Jan-2004
Ancillary relief. . .
Cited – M v M 2003
The court considered how to treat periodical payments in a settlement of an ancillary relief claim where a clean break was not possible and where the husband had a substantial income. . .
Cited – Cornick v Cornick (No 2) CA 2-Jan-1995
The court considered the boundary of its power in ordering periodical payments: ‘I do not believe that Hale J erred in her approach in principle to this case, and I reject the submission which Mr Mostyn has made that there was a delimiting factor . .
Cited – Cowan v Cowan CA 14-May-2001
When considering the division of matrimonial assets following a divorce, the court’s duty was, within the context of the rules set down by the Act, to impose a fair settlement according to the circumstances. Courts should be careful not to make . .
Cited – Purba v Purba CA 1-Jul-1999
The court considered an appeal against an award in an ancillary relief case on divorce. The husband had it was thought deliberately hidden assets, but the husband claimed that the wife’s budget was excessive. Thorpe LJ said: ‘I see no force in the . .
Cited – White v White HL 26-Oct-2000
The couple going through the divorce each had substantial farms and wished to continue farming. It had been a long marriage.
Held: Where a division of the assets of a family would satisfy the reasonable needs of either party on an ancillary . .

Cited by:

Cited – Sorrell v Sorrell FD 29-Jul-2005
The parties contested ancillary relief on their divorce. The marriage had been very long, and the assets were very substantial. The husband contended that these assets represented an exceptional contribution on his part.
Held: In this case an . .
See Also – Miller v Miller; M v M (Short Marriage: Clean Break) CA 29-Jul-2005
The parties contested ancillary relief where there had been only a short marriage, but where here were considerable family assets available for division. The wife sought to rely upn the husband’s behaviour to counter any argument as to the shortness . .
Not followed – Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane HL 24-May-2006
Fairness on Division of Family Capital
The House faced the question of how to achieve fairness in the division of property following a divorce. In the one case there were substantial assets but a short marriage, and in the other a high income, but low capital.
Held: The 1973 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.195568

F v F (Ancillary Relief: Substantial Assets): FD 1995

The wife of a rich man wanted pounds 2.5M to purchase a home for herself and the children pending the determination of her claims for ancillary relief. There was no fund to draw on but the husband had ample means. She sought lump sum provision in advance of the anticipated hearing date three months thence alternatively an appropriation order for the property she wished to purchase. The court was asked whether or not there was jurisdiction to entertain the summons. The parties had signed a prenuptial agreement, which would confine the wife to the pension of a retired German judge in the event of their divorce (the wife was in the judicial civil service at the time of the marriage).
Held: Duxbury style orders were to be followed where a Husband has very substantial assets. The court could apply a 4.25% interest rate.
As to the pre-nuptial agreement: ‘In this jurisdiction they must be of very limited significance. The rights and responsibilities of those whose financial affairs are regulated by statute cannot be much influenced by contractual terms which were devised for the control and limitation of standards that are intended to be of universal application throughout our society.’
Thorpe J said: ‘Mr Singleton (for the wife) argues that the court has power to order an interim lump sum, alternatively a lump sum by stages, the first fixed and paid preceding the substantive hearing, and the second quantified at that hearing. Mr Blair (for the husband) marshals the argument that there is no such power and that there is clear authority to that effect. My preference is for Mr Blair’s submissions, but it is not necessary for me to decide the point on this summons for I find that Mr Singleton’s alternative presentation is more relevant to this dispute and more persuasive. He relies on the decision of Waite J. in the case of Barry -v- Barry.’ and ‘In my experience following divorce and within ancillary relief proceedings, the cost of rehousing the wife and children may be a crucial issue – indeed even the only issue. In most cases it would be undesirable to pre-empt that issue or confine the judicial discretion to be exercised at the final hearing. But where the available assets are very substantial the cost of rehousing the wife and children is only one of a number determinations, the summation of which will be a lump sum that accompanies the mutual dismissal of all claims. In the preparation for the final hearing the purchase of a property in advance of that hearing may be the subject of some tactical manoeuvring. If the husband judges that the cost of a proposed property is less than the budget that the judge might fix, he encourages and facilitates the purchase. If he thinks it more than the budget he obstructs. Conversely, the wife may propose a purchase at the top end of the range, not only to fix that ingredient to the lump sum, but to establish subsequent income and expenditure that will be reflected in the Duxbury calculation.
Where there are children, they may be prejudiced by adult manoeuvring and selfishness. Where all the assets liquid and illiquid are owned by the husband he may be in a position to exert unfair pressure on the wife, who may for particular reasons need to sign a contract in advance of the fixture.
In these circumstances what is needed is a judicial discretion to ensure fair play pending the final hearing.’

Judges:

Thorpe J

Citations:

Ind Summary 26-Feb-1996, [1995] 2 FLR 45

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Radmacher v Granatino CA 2-Jul-2009
Husband and wife, neither English, had married in England. Beforehand they had signed a prenuptial agreement in Germany agreeing that neither should claim against the other on divorce. The wife appealed against an order to pay a lump sum to the . .
Cited – Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino SC 20-Oct-2010
The parties, from Germany and France married and lived at first in England. They had signed a pre-nuptial agreement in Germany which would have been valid in either country of origin. H now appealed against a judgment which bound him to it, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.80438

AG v VD: FD 10 Jul 2020

Summons issued in the context of proceedings brought by AG (the wife ‘W’) for financial remedy orders in proceedings brought under Part III Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 against VD (the husband ‘H’). By his summons, H seeks an order that W produces the files of her previous legal advisors.

Judges:

Cohen J

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1847 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.655267