The Financial Remedies Conference 2026
Elizabeth Bowden reports from the Class Legal Financial Remedies Conference.
Elizabeth Bowden (College Chambers)
read more
K v K [2026] EWFC 83 (B)
DJ Parker’s decision emphasises the importance of the court transcript where there is a dispute as to what was said by the judge. Ultimately H’s application to set aside a final order by consent failed because H was wrong; the FDR judge had not given him a 28-day cooling off period.
Louise Tickle & Anor v The BBC & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 42
Sir Geoffrey Vos MR, King LJ and Warby LJ. While anonymisation of judges is theoretically possible, it is highly unlikely. The integrity of the justice system depends on the judge sitting in public and being named, even if they sit in private.
AB v CD [2025] EWFC 253 (B)
DJ Dodsworth’s short judgment gives a blueprint of how not to prepare a case for trial, and how not to make a relief from sanctions application.
BC v BC [2025] EWFC 236
Peel J. Save for four specific matters, parties cannot refer to what happened at the pFDR. The Financial Remedies Court – Primary Principles paragraph 8 issued by Mostyn J and HHJ Hess goes too far by saying that the court should be told that offers were made and that an was indication given.
THR v WAT [2025] EWHC 1125 (Fam)
Judgment date: 17 March 2025
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/fam/2025/1125
HHJ Hess (sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court) navigated his way through an Xydhias puzzle. Parties informed the judge they were Xydhias-bound but then argued over (i) a £2m asset, (ii) costs, (iii)
Prenups Aren’t ‘Sign and Done’: Why Reviews Matter Just as Much as the Ring
I am a big fan of prenuptial/pre-civil partnership agreements (‘prenups’) because, at the very least, both parties are forced to have really open and transparent conversations about money, finances, goals and aspirations. If you think about it, anyone looking to make marriage/civil partnership vows should do this before