Special contributions: Consigned to history?

Lisa Churchill highlights how the approach to special contributions has changed over the years and how such contributions have been quantified by the courts The courts are seemingly now more cautious in departing from equality due to the special contribution of one party. Special contribution in a marriage has often been a difficult argument to …
This post is only available to members.

AAZ v BBZ [2016] EWHC 3234 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Autumn 2017 #169

AAZ (W) applied for financial orders ancillary to her divorce from BBZ (H). H was the sole director of the second respondent C Ltd, a Cypriot registered company and the trustee of a Bermudian Discretionary Trust (the trust). P Ltd, the third respondent, is a Panamian company which H said was within the trust. P Ltd was said to hold the bulk of the wealth in the case. None of the respondents took any part in the trial. H was in breach of several court orders, including one compelling his personal attendance for the duration of the trial.

H and W had been married since 1993 when the...

Trusts: A safe foundation

Claire Blakemore suggests that when dealing with trust assets, even the powers of the family courts have their limits ‘Any inconsistencies between how the trust is used or the trust documentation and the presentation to the court can have a significant impact on the outcome.’The law on the treatment of trusts on divorce is constantly …
This post is only available to members.

International Focus: Developing markets

Rita Ku and Philippa Hewitt outline family law in China, and cross-border issues with Hong Kong, in the context of the rapid growth in Chinese high-net-worth divorces ‘A common scenario sees a wife and children living in Shenzhen, Beijing or Shanghai while the husband and father lives and works in Hong Kong.’ The papers are …
This post is only available to members.

Clayton v Clayton [2016] NZSC 29

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | July/August 2016 #161

Mr and Mrs Clayton were married in 1989, had two daughters who were born in 1990 and 1994, separated in 2006 and were divorced in 2009. By the time of the separation Mr Clayton had built up a significant saw milling and timber processing business, which operated from land and buildings in Vaughan Road, Rotorua. By declaration of trust dated 14 June 1999 (VRPT) Mr Clayton settled the land and buildings, with himself as sole trustee, on discretionary trusts for the benefit of a class of beneficiaries that included Mr Clayton as ‘principal family member’, Mrs Clayton as his wife...

Trusts: Offshore assets and the divorce pot

Leela Hemmings examines the approach of the UK divorce court to offshore trusts and trustees in BJ v MJ ‘Relying on the court’s authority pursuant to the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, the judgment reviewed the various forms of trusts and discussed how each would be treated in divorce proceedings.’ Often the biggest unknown in financial …
This post is only available to members.

BJ v MJ [2011] EWHC 2708 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | April 2012 #118

The husband (H) and the wife (W) were both 65, having married in 1980. There was one child of the marriage (C), aged 25. The former matrimonial home was Green Farm, a substantial property set in 72 acres in Kent. Trust assets fell to be divided following divorce.

In order to mitigate tax on the floatation of his company (ABC), two Jersey trusts were created by H in 1994 (No. 1 Trust and No. 2 Trust) and a company incorporated in the British Virgin Island called Giloch Investments Ltd (Giloch). No. 1 Trust was a discrertionary trust for a class of beneficiaries comprising H, W, C, ...

Trusts And Divorce: Access all areas?

Whaley v Whaley poses the question of when a trust fund is a ‘resource’ in divorce proceedings, as Emily Exton explains The divorce case of Whaley v Whaley [2011] is a stark example of the application of well-established principles in the family courts concerning the treatment of a trust fund as a resource to which …
This post is only available to members.