header-logo header-logo

12 September 2014
Issue: 7621 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Family proceedings

Barnett v Barnett [2014] EWHC 2678 (Fam), [2014] All ER (D) 36 (Aug)

The parties divorced in Bulgaria and the wife applied pursuant to s 13 of the Matrimonial and Family Proceeding Act 1984, for leave to apply for financial relief pursuant to Pt III of that Act after an overseas divorce between the parties. The Family Division held that leave would be granted and that rr 14 and 15 of Family Court (Composition and Distribution of Business) Rules 2014 (SI 2014/840) read together with the definition of “the court” in the Act meant that at the point of granting leave the court, acting judicially, might make a decision as to where the substantial application should be issued and as to the allocation of the future substantive proceedings.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll