When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Burrows looks at recent caselaw, including the February appeal decision of Ms Justice Henke in Archer v Archer (now sent back to the family court for rehearing of facts) as well as older decisions. Archer involved a divorcing couple who owned a farm on which the husband’s parents claimed a beneficial interest in a barn.
But when is it inevitable or even desirable to add a third party (a joinder or intervener) to what must surely already be fairly fraught financial provision proceedings? Burrows writes: ‘Adding a non-party to family property proceedings may not always be the most cost-effective way of dealing with property issues, as Archer, perhaps, shows.’
