FRJ stage

Nicholas Allen KC

Nicholas Allen KC

Barrister and Joint Head of Chambers at 29 Bedford Row (London). Door Tenant at St. Ives (Birmingham). IFLA arbitrator and PFDR/ENE tribunal. Appointe...

read more

NCDR Redux: The Impact of October’s CPR Amendments

NCDR Redux: The Impact of October’s CPR Amendments

One of the changes to the FPR 2010 made when the material parts of the Family Procedure (Amendment No 2) Rules 2023 came into force on 29 April 2024 was an amendment to r 28.3(7) which by the insertion of a new (aa)(ii) makes ‘any failure by

HJB v WPB: Beware the Preliminary Issue

HJB v WPB: Beware the Preliminary Issue

In BN v MA [2013] EWHC 4250 (Fam) Mostyn J observed: ‘[24] … In Granatino v Radmacher the Supreme Court analysed very closely the nature of nuptial agreements. They pointed out that nuptial agreements come in numerous shapes and forms and can be entered into at any point before, during or

What Is a ‘Predicament of Real Need’?

What Is a ‘Predicament of Real Need’?

In Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2010] 2 FLR 1900 at [81] Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers said that of the three strands identified in White v White [2000] 2 FLR 981 and Miller/McFarlane [2006] 1 FLR 1186 it was needs and compensation which could most readily render it

Impact of Conduct on Needs

Impact of Conduct on Needs

Introduction In exercising its powers in financial remedy proceedings, the court is required to have regard to the ‘conduct of each of the parties if that conduct is such that it would in the opinion of the court be inequitable to disregard it’: s 25(2)(g) Matrimonial Causes Act

AT v BT: The Return of Compensation

AT v BT: The Return of Compensation

In AT v BT [2023] EWHC 3531 Francis J considered what he described (at [4]) as ‘the proper approach of the court to the sharing principle and to the principle of compensation’ given that ‘the husband maintains that this is a pure needs case and the wife asserts that this

‘Known Unknowns and Unknown Unknowns’ – Can a Change in the Law Be a Barder Event?

‘Known Unknowns and Unknown Unknowns’ – Can a Change in the Law Be a Barder Event?

Can a change in domestic law, resulting from judicial tergiversation, ever satisfy the Barder test? The answer to this question depends, in part, on how widely or narrowly the Barder test is interpreted. In recent years it has often been interpreted narrowly – particularly by Mostyn J in DB v DLJ

Standish – the Narrowing of ‘Matrimonialisation’

Standish – the Narrowing of ‘Matrimonialisation’

In L v L [2021] EWFC B83 His Honour Judge Booth (sitting as a judge of the High Court) stated at [26] he had been referred to the concept of ‘matrimonialisation’ but it was ‘a word that I hope will not acquire common usage’. Although not a word in the