The online information & webinar resource for private family lawyers.
New to watch
What is the impact of Covid-19 to investors & how are family lawyers and their clients affected?
How has the Covid crisis affected pensions on divorce?
Coronavirus & its impact on Family Law (Part 2: Children)
Coronavirus & its impact on Family Law so far (Part 1: Finance)
New to read
-
Easy as CEV? How to treat pensions upon divorce: W v H (divorce: financial remedies) [2020] EWFC B10
In this judgment, HHJ Edward Hess discussed three issues relating to the treatment of pensions upon divorce and considered the opinions of The Pension Advisory Group set out in their report, “A Guide to the Treatment of Pensions on Divorce”, published in July 2019. News, 28/05/2020, free -
Reappointment of Professor Nicholas Hopkins as Law Commissioner for property, family and trust law
The Secretary of State has announced the re-appointment of Professor Nicholas Hopkins as Law Commissioner for property, family and trust law. News, 28/05/2020, free -
Drop in private family law cases received by CAFCASS
The latest monthly statistics are available to view. News, 28/05/2020, free -
New standard orders announced by Mr Justice Mostyn
Orders Nos 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, and 2.2. have all been revised, with the agreement of the President of the Family Division. News, 28/05/2020, free -
The Remote Access Family Court – What Have We Learnt So Far in England and Wales?
Mr Justice MacDonald, Deputy Head of International Family Justice for England and Wales, International Academy of Family Lawyers Webinar, 21 May 2020 News, 28/05/2020, free -
HM Attorney General v Akhter & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 122
The Attorney General appealed from a decision to pronounce a decree nisi of nullity following a marriage ceremony which the parties had known was of no legal effect. The petitioner and respondent had reached an agreed settlement, so arguments on matters of law were made on behalf of the first intervener, a petitioner in separate nullity proceedings. The issues were whether there could be ceremonies or other acts which do not create a marriage, even a void marriage, within the scope of section 11 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973; and if there could be, whether this had been such a ceremony, currently described as a non-marriage, or whether instead, as Williams J had decided, it had created a void marriage. Sir Terence Etherton MR (the Master of the Rolls), King LJ DBE and Moylan LJ set aside the judge's order as there was, in this case, no ceremony in respect of which a decree of nullity could be granted pursuant to the provisions of section 11. The judge's approach was supported by neither the European Convention on Human Rights nor the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1990. Judgment, 28/05/2020, free -
Moutreuil v Andreewitch (Contempt: No.2) [2020] EWHC 1301 (Fam)
The parties lived together for about 20 years before separating, and had five children together, but never married. This was an application from the female partner for an order that the male partner be sanctioned for multiple breaches of a freezing order. He in turn argued that any breach of the freezing order was inadvertent. It was accepted by both parties that the relevant account was left depleted by the sum of £13,015.94. Cobb J found that the male partner's narrative was "simply implausible", and his explanations "contrived and disingenuous". He had treated the account as his personal account. He had breached the freezing order, and the breaches had been knowing and deliberate. Sanctions would be decided at a subsequent hearing. Judgment, 26/05/2020, free -
Re X (Fact finding Hearing Special Measures) [2019] EWFC B88
The father sought a child arrangements order while the mother opposed any direct contact. The mother alleged that she was the victim of the father's domestic violence and abuse. The case had engaged special measures, with a screen being used for the mother and the father being required to provide Willans J with his questions for her in advance, though Willans J expressed "grave reservations as to the resulting quality of evidence received". The allegations of rape and abduction were not found to be proven, while both mother and father were found to have sent inappropriate communications of a harassing nature to each other. Though the mother was found to have demonstrated implacable hostility, Willans J was not persuaded that the effects of this amounted to parental alienation. Consideration would now have to be given to whether contact could be re-established. The case needed to progress, and a Children's Guardian would be appointed prior to fixing a directions appointment. Judgment, 25/05/2020, free
