Family Law Hub

Welcome to the Family Law Hub

Know-how, update and training for the private family lawyer. Click here to find out more..

New to Family Law Hub

  • Barker v Winter [2018] EWHC 1785 (QB) Claim for damages after the claimant cohabitee claimed that she had been deceived by the defendant in spending her divorce settlement money on a lavish lifestyle after he promised to pay her back and buy her a house when his own divorce had concluded. Judgment, 16/07/2018, free
  • Thum v Thum [2018] EWCA Civ 624 The wife's divorce petition was issued in England in October 2015. An attempt to serve the petition on the husband was made in February 2016 in Germany where he was living at the time, but this failed because of insufficient address details being given by the wife. In the meantime, the husband had commenced divorce proceedings in Germany in January 2016. The husband was appealing against a ruling that the English court was first seised on the grounds that the wife had failed to take the required steps to serve the petition. The appeal was dismissed, the court saying that Rule 7.8 FPR simply requires the petitioner to serve the petition. No particular step is stipulated as having to take place "immediately" or by a certain date. Judgment, 16/07/2018, free
  • M (BIIa Article 19: Court First Seised) [2018] EWCA Civ 1637 Mother's appeal against an order that she return the children to the UK from Poland after the English court ruled that they, and not the Polish court, had jurisdiction. The appeal was allowed, the court saying that the Polish court became and had remained seised of jurisdiction in relation to the children. Judgment, 16/07/2018, free
  • B (A Child) [2018] EWHC 1643 (Fam) Father's application for the return of the child to Spain after the mother had wrongfully removed him to the UK. The 'disastrous state of affairs' had resulted in the child being taken into care when the mother returned to Brazil and found herself unable to return to the UK. Judgment, 16/07/2018, free
  • Government response to child maintenance collection and enforcement consultation published Consultation ran until February 2018 News, 12/07/2018, free
  • Supreme Court judgment in Mills due next week Will be handed down on 18 July News, 12/07/2018, free
  • Mantegazza v Mantegazza [2017] EWHC 3811 (Fam) Application by the husband for a stay of divorce proceedings started by the wife in England where he wanted the proceedings to be held in Switzerland. The application was granted. Judgment, 09/07/2018, free
  • RVH v TF (Non Hague Convention: Refusal of Summary Return) [2018] EWHC 1680 (Fam) The applicant father was seeking the summary return to Ivory Coast of the parties' 2 children. The application was made pursuant to the Inherent Jurisdiction following the mother's removal of the children from Ivory Coast. The court concluded that it was not in the best interests of the children to be returned to Ivory Coast. Judgment, 05/07/2018, free
  • Dunkley v Dunkley & Anor [2018] EWFC 5 The applicant's application for a declaration of parentage was refused on the grounds that his conduct in making and pursuing this application was manifestly abusive. Judgment, 03/07/2018, free
  • M v F [2018] EWFC 35 An interim order for child maintenance was made as well as an order for costs in favour of the mother in circumstances where the father, despite his vast wealth, had defied various orders and was resisting making payments towards the children's upkeep. Judgment, 03/07/2018, free

Don't miss

Copyright 

Copyright in the original legal material published on the Family Law Hub is vested in Mills & Reeve LLP (as per date of publication shown on screen) unless indicated otherwise.

Disclaimer

The Family Law Hub website relates to the legal position in England Wales and all of the material within it has been prepared with the aim of providing key information only and does not constitute legal advice in relation to any particular situation. While Mills & Reeve LLP aims to ensure that the information is correct at the date on which it is added to the website, the legal position can change frequently, and content will not always be updated following any relevant changes. You therefore acknowledge and agree that Mills & Reeve LLP and its members and employees accept no liability whatsoever in contract, tort or otherwise for any loss or damage caused by or arising directly or indirectly in connection with any use or reliance on the contents of our website except to the extent that such liability cannot be excluded by law.

Bookmark this item