In the second paragraph of his short judgment (agreeing with Lord Wilson and the other five SCJJ with whom they sat) Lord Neuberger – in Gohil v Gohil [2015] UKSC 61 (14 October 2015) – summed up Gohil and Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60 (14 October 2015)) thus: [44] … where a party’s non-disclosure […]
Common law and law reports The prompt for this article came from the fact that increasing numbers of judgements are being published by BAILII which can be published; but some of them cannot be cited in court. That is not to blame BAILII: they perform a brilliant public service in making so many judgments […]
President of Family Division says family proceedings rules ‘not fit for purpose’ In an address to Family Law Bar Association (their annual dinner) on 26 February 2016 Sir James Munby President of the Family Division, included the following comment: The Family Procedure Rules, like their civil counterparts, are a masterpiece of traditional, […]
Fraud and the set aside jurisdiction Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60 (14 October 2015) has reminded lawyers of the importance of fraud in family proceedings, especially in the non-disclosure set aside area. The subject must recall for any lawyer the dangers inherent in pleading fraud or other serious misconduct. Family proceedings rules on the […]
Some preliminary thoughts in the form of a rough procedural guide on setting aside a financial order in family proceedings after Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60 (14 October 2015); and Gohil v Gohil [2015] UKSC 61 (14 October 2015) (1) Money proceedings Who may apply Either party to ancillary relief order, […]
Some ‘protean’ power… In Mostyn J condones non-disclosure (https://dbfamilylaw.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/mostyn-j-condones-non-disclosure-imerman-documents-and-ul-v-bk/ ) I explained why the judge’s guidance in UL v BK (Freezing Orders: Safeguards: Standard Examples) [2013] UKHC 1735 (Fam) could be regarded as a ‘cheats charter’. The same case and the judge’s comments on inherent jurisdiction injunction orders now merit review. UL v BK was […]
Setting aside a consent order MAP v RAP [2013] EWHC 4784 (Fam), Mostyn J (3 December 2013) http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2013/4784.html shows how muddled the law can become – as between substantive law, procedure and practice guidance – if judges do not remind themselves where law shades into subsidiary legislation, and subsidiary legislation into guidance and judicial obiter […]
Public bodies and applications in the family court The case of Re X (A Child) [2014] EWHC 2522 (Admin) (considered also in http://suesspiciousminds.com/2014/07/23/serious-case-review-versus-judicial-review-a-cough-review/ under the heading: Serious case review against judicial review: a review) prompts the question: why cannot the family court hear all issues with administrative law aspects or other the intervention of public […]
dbfamilylaw 