December 2017/January 2018 #172 – Law Journals

Substantial Assets: A one-sided argument

Beth Mason and Georgia Day examine a case involving a large amount of assets, but also issues relevant to cases concerned with lesser sums ‘If a solicitor becomes a client’s ”man of business”, advising the client on investment matters, finance policy and other business matters, then the advice may lack the relevant legal context for …

Continue reading "Substantial Assets: A one-sided argument"

This post is only available to members.

Freezing Orders: Wrong court, wrong time, wrong reasons

Katie Chew explains the lessons to be learnt from a decision of Mostyn J on how not to make a without notice application for a freezing order ‘The applicant has a high duty of candour when making an application without notice that, if breached, could lead to the order being discharged.’ In Tobias v Tobias …

Continue reading "Freezing Orders: Wrong court, wrong time, wrong reasons"

This post is only available to members.

Civil Restraint Orders: Beyond control?

Danielle Taylor sets out the circumstances in which the courts may prohibit a party from making further applications, and the limitations of such orders ‘Mostyn J suggested that there should be in place an up-to-date and fully accessible register of all civil restraint orders, together with an automatic flagging system, so that when an application …

Continue reading "Civil Restraint Orders: Beyond control?"

This post is only available to members.

In Practice: Holding all the cards

Andrew Baines explores the use of power in resolving issues arising from family breakdown ‘Each parent may seek to promote their ways to the exclusion of the other parent’s: this is done through their power-plays, the parents using such power as is available to them to achieve their ends.’ Family lawyers have a certain reticence …

Continue reading "In Practice: Holding all the cards"

This post is only available to members.

Trusts: Divining intention

Abigail Lowther considers sham trusts and their effect on financial claims ‘A sham must be a sham at the point of its creation – it cannot subsequently become a sham because of the changed intentions of one or both of the parties.’ In ND v SD [2017] Roberts J considered sham trusts, the beneficial ownership …

Continue reading "Trusts: Divining intention"

This post is only available to members.

Hadkinson Orders: Harsh realities

Rachel Nicholl highlights a remedy available where a litigant wilfully fails to comply with a court order ‘Hadkinson orders are draconian, should not be commonplace and are a case management order of last resort in substantive proceedings where a litigant is in wilful contempt.’ In Assoun v Assoun [No 1] [2017] and Assoun v Assoun …

Continue reading "Hadkinson Orders: Harsh realities"

This post is only available to members.