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...

Business Assets: Back to reality

Joanne Green looks at business assets including valuations, issues of liquidity and the options available to the court ‘When deciding how to deal with the business assets, the court should first consider whether there are any available funds in the business and if there are, the most tax-efficient way of extracting them from the business.’When …
This post is only available to members.

Family Businesses: The golden goose

Rebecca Stone reviews the case law relating to family businesses and the differing approaches taken by the courts to such assets ‘In F v F (clean break: balance of fairness) [2003] the judge accepted that where some of the assets are illiquid it may not be possible to achieve either the aim of equality or …
This post is only available to members.

AC v DC & ors [2012] EWHC 2032 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2013 #130

Mostyn J granted an application by the applicant (W) to set aside transactions pursuant to s37(2) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 that had been made by the first respondent (H) on about 2 December 2010 by which H disposed of his 86.4% shareholding in D Holdings Limited (DH). None of the respondents opposed the application. There was an issue whether or not the effect of the order operated retrospectively for all purposes, including fiscal purposes. Judgment was reserved and further written submissions were invited to determine whether the order setting aside the transact...

AR v AR [2011] EWHC 2717 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | April 2012 #118

The parties separated after a relationship of approximately 25 years and the wife commenced divorce proceedings (decree nisi being pronounced in October 2010). They had one child who was aged 18 (the husband had three children by his first marriage). The husband was aged 66 and the wife 54.

The total wealth was in the region of £21-£24m (all but approximately £1m was in the husband’s name). The source of the husband’s wealth was a business that his father bought shortly after the second world war, which floated in the 1950s and sold in the late 1980s. From his father, ...

Tax: Planning for tax

Karen Eckstein and Frances Bailey highlight the impact of tax planning on financial provision ‘Even with expert evidence making assumptions in relation to contingent assets is a risky strategy to take, as demonstrated by Judge v Judge [2008].’The saying is that there are only two certainties in life: death and taxes; save that in fact …
This post is only available to members.

Companies: Corporate raiders

Frances Bailey and Steven Watson examine the options when dealing with family businesses ‘A lump sum payment may be ordered if it is established or accepted that the party will be able to extract liquidity out of the company to meet that payment.’When it comes to negotiating financial settlements, finding the right result for our …
This post is only available to members.