header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 8 September 2023

08 September 2023
Issue: 8039 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Family proceedings

A v M [2023] EWHC 1900 (Fam), [2023] All ER (D) 96 (Aug)

The High Court, Family Division, upheld an application by both the applicant husband and respondent wife for a reporting restriction order (RRO), having dismissed an appeal by the husband. The husband and wife were separated. The husband’s companies had entered insolvent administration. It fell to be determined, among other things: (i) the test to be applied to an application to adduce fresh evidence under FPR 30.12(2)(b); (ii) whether the trial court had been incorrect in finding that any award would likely go the husband’s creditors; and (iii) whether an RRO should be granted. The court held that (i) the application for leave to adduce fresh evidence under FPR 30.12(2)(b) had been totally without merit; (ii) the previous judge’s findings that any large amount of outright capital would be attached by the husband’s creditors and the maintenance award were impregnable; and (iii) the request for redactions met the necessary standard that there had been a significant risk that,

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll