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

  • New Research: Understanding the views and experiences of professionals taking part in the settlement conferences pilot Report presents the findings from 33 qualitative interviews with a range of professional participants including family judges, legal representatives, Cafcass guardians and social workers News, 16/04/2019, free
  • FT v MM & Anor [2019] EWHC 935 (Fam) Contrary to court orders, the father had wrongfully taken his son – a young man of nineteen with profound learning disabilities – to live in the USA. The mother sought an order for his return to the UK. Russell J DBE held that there were grounds for finding that a return to the UK was not in the young man's best interests. The child's future as an adult lay in the USA and these proceedings were to come to an end in recognition of that fact. The appropriate forum for any future litigation was the court in Texas. Judgment, 15/04/2019, free
  • Jurisdiction and Judgments (Family) (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) (No. 2) Regulations 2019 Coming into force immediately before EU exit day. SI, 11/04/2019, free
  • XW v XH [2019] EWCA Civ 549 The wife's application for a reporting restrictions order was granted by King, Underhill and Moylan LJJ. In this case, the Article 8 rights of the family members outweighed the Article 10 rights of the media. Article, 11/04/2019, free
  • TB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Ors (Child support - other) [2019] UKUT 79 (AAC) Upper Tribunal Judge Ward allowed the appeal by the non-resident father. who was applying for a supersession on the basis that his daughter had ceased to be a qualifying "child", being no longer in full-time non-advanced education. The First-tier Tribunal had made an error of law in refusing the application on the grounds that child benefit was still being paid. Judgment, 11/04/2019, free
  • Ipekçi v McConnell [2019] EWFC 19 A financial remedy application made by a husband against his wife, the great-granddaughter of the founder of Avon Products, Inc. The Judge, Mr Justice Mostyn, had to determine if the capital from the family trust was available to the wife and was the pre-nuptial agreement void? He found that the money was available to the wife and that the agreement was invalid. He awarded the husband £1,333,500 to meet his needs. Judgment, 11/04/2019, free
  • H v T (Judicial Change of Mind) [2018] EWHC 3692 (Fam) MacDonald J initially concluded that the judge's award exceeded the wife's housing need. However, following the circulation of his draft judgment, his attention was drawn to a significant material omission in the figures that had underpinned those conclusions, and he decided that the manner in which the judge chose to structure the disposition was not after all wrong, and the husband's appeal was dismissed. Judgment, 10/04/2019, free
  • Hammoud v Zawawi [2019] EWHC 839 (Fam) The wealthy husband, a citizen of Oman, had divorced his wife there by means of unilateral talaq and financially "pulled up the drawbridge", leaving the wife resident in the UK with large debts. Holman J made an order on a clean break basis, with the husband ordered to pay the wife a total sum of £24m. Judgment, 09/04/2019, free
  • G (Children: Intractable Dispute) [2019] EWCA Civ 548 The father appealed against an order which prevented him from bringing further applications for contact or residence for three years. The judge had found that the children would suffer emotional harm if required to have direct contact with the father, who had completely lost sight of their welfare. Longmore, Peter Jackson and Coulson LJJ dismissed the appeal. Judgment, 09/04/2019, free
  • Rogan v Rogan [2019] EWHC 814 (Fam) The restored hearing of a judgment summons for the committal to prison of the former husband, for significant arrears of maintenance. Holman J was not yet willing to make a suspended order for committal and further adjourned the committal hearing. Judgment, 09/04/2019, free

Don't miss


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.


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