Family Law Hub


Latest updates

  • The wife made a claim for financial relief after a divorce in Russia. A claim for £2m was made against her by a company of which the husband had been the sole director. She claimed that this was a sham. The husband did not engage at all with the court during the proceedings, though the company did, and he gave no disclosure of his means. Holman J was satisfied that it was appropriate to make an order for financial relief, and that an award of £5m to the wife, leaving at least £17m to the husband, would not do him any injustice. It was less than the wife would have been awarded had all the proceedings taken place in England and Wales. The wife was also entitled to an order for costs against the company and the husband. The judge recognised, however, that enforcement of his orders would be difficult. Judgment, 09/05/2019, free
  • The husband sought permission to proceed with committal proceedings against the wife for contempt of court, after she made false claims in court regarding her possession of a work by the Polish painter Caziel. Mostyn J declined permission; the husband could pursue the more serious matter of perjury. The husband would recover his costs of the enforcement application on the indemnity basis, and 50% of his costs of the committal proceedings on the standard basis. Judgment, 26/04/2019, free
  • Appeal from the decision dismissing the amended application by the Appellant to set aside the order authorising substituted service on him of the bankruptcy petition, annul the bankruptcy order made against him and dismiss the bankruptcy petition. Judgment, 01/03/2019, free
  • An order which ordered the wife to pay £20,000 towards the husband's costs after the breakdown of the marriage was left undisturbed as the order was not outside the spectrum of reasonable decisions that might have been made. Judgment, 26/02/2019, free
  • Appeal against a costs order made against the husband in financial remedy proceedings on the grounds of procedure and the judge's determination. Appeal dismissed. Judgment, 25/01/2019, free

Latest know-how

Latest training

  • In this recorded webinar, Petra Teacher from 29 Bedford Row discusses how the courts have dealt with add-backs and financial conduct arguments. Webcast, 14/06/2017, members only
  • Recording of webinar first broadcast on 8 February 2017 Webcast, 10/02/2017, members only
  • Course Objective: By the end of the session you should have an understanding of the regulatory issues relating to unbundled services and learnt how you can manage your client when offering such services. First broadcast on 3 February 2017. Running time 69 mins. Webcast, 07/02/2017, members only
  • Philip Cayford QC and Simon Calhaem of 29 Bedford Row, who represented Mrs Wyatt in the Supreme Court, are joined by members of the Mills & Reeve family law team to review and discuss the issues raised by the case and the impact of the Law Lords decision on practice. Webcast, 18/03/2015, members only
  • Webcast recorded on 22 January at 1pm. Lysney Cade-Davies and Petra Teacher of 29 Bedford Row review some of the leading cases of 2014 and highlight the lessons for the year ahead. Webcast, 22/01/2015, members only

Latest sources

  • In force 17 July 2015. This Order amends the Family Proceedings Fees Order 2008 (S.I. 2008/1054), which governs the fees payable in family proceedings in England and Wales in the High Court and the Family Court. Article 2(2) disapplies fees in proceedings relating to female genital mutilation orders under Schedule 2 Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. Article 2(3) disapplies fees for requests for service by a bailiff of female genital mutilation protection orders, or applications for, or to vary or discharge, female genital mutilation protection orders. SI (external), 23/07/2015, free
  • This Statutory Instrument, which came into force on 8 July 2013, amends the Family Procedure Rules 2010 in relation to the procedure for applying for an order in relation to the costs of legal expenses, which is possible under the provisions of ss. 49 - 54 Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2013. The rules themselves do not make such orders possible (that is done by ss.49 - 54), but clarify the procedure to be used in applying for an order. SI (external), 13/03/2013, free
  • Statute (external), 15/05/2012, free
  • Statute (external), 15/05/2012, free
  • Statute (external), 15/05/2012, free


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