- Everything (208)
- Model letter (0)
- Practice note (0)
- Precedent (0)
- Uploads (0)
- Tools (0)
- Article (3)
- Case note (76)
- News (6)
- Polls (0)
- CPD course (0)
- CPD diploma (0)
- Training note (0)
- Webinar (7)
- Downloads (0)
- Form (10)
- Judgment (105)
- Practice direction (0)
- Rule (0)
- SI (0)
- Statute (0)
- International regs (0)
- A costs order in the sum of £15,000 was made against the father of the child after he had continually breached court orders. Judgment, 13/10/2017, free
- Financial remedy hearing where the husband, a LiP, failed to disclose his assets and whose McKenzie Friend was excluded from the court after several interruptions, an outburst and threatened complaints against the judge, the solicitor for the wife and criminal sanctions against the wife. Judgment, 21/09/2017, free
- General CRO was made after the husband issued County Court claims, despite the existence of an extended civil restraint order. Judgment, 28/07/2017, free
- The issue which arose for determination in this case was how the costs of an instructed Special Advocate should be funded in family proceedings where closed material held by the police related to a conspiracy to murder the father. The police were ordered to fund the Special Advocate. Judgment, 18/07/2017, free
- Costs order made against the fertility clinic where there had been mistakes with the paperwork. Judgment, 11/05/2017, free
- Costs order made against the fertility clinic where there had been mistakes with the paperwork. Judgment, 11/05/2017, free
- Costs order made against the fertility clinic where there had been mistakes with the paperwork. Judgment, 11/05/2017, free
- A statutory charge was not and could not be applicable to the applicant's award of damages in a HRA claim. Judgment, 14/11/2016, free
- The father was ordered to pay the mother's costs of contested Schedule 1 Children Act proceedings that resulted in an order against the father following a claim being brought by the mother on the child's behalf. Judgment, 04/11/2016, free
- Costs hearing which ruled that the W should pay the H 50% of his costs relating to his successful application that a consent order should be set aside due to material non-disclosure by the W. Judgment, 11/10/2016, free