Family Law Hub

DB v PB [2016] EWHC 3431 (Fam)

In a tweet: Achieving fairness in the face of an unfair PNA and where EU Maintenance Reg ties the English courts hands

This content is only available to members

If you are a current member log on now.

If you are not a member contact Class Legal on 01652 652222 or email them via to get started.

Case note, published: 02/02/2017


See also

  • The wife and husband were both Swedish. It was a long marriage of 21 years, there were 2 children of the marriage and the assets were worth nearly £11m. The existence of 3 pre-nuptial agreements meant that the wife lost her sharing claim. It was also impermissible for the court to make a maintenance order by reason of the Maintenance Regulation and she had to fall back on a Schedule 1 claim until such time as the Swedish court either determined the maintenance claim or declined to hear it. Judgment, 25/01/2017, free

Published: 02/02/2017


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