Cases Sale of Property Executory Orders Setting Aside Orders (Including Barder Applications) TLATA Open in SR v HR [2018] EWHC 606 (Fam) Judgment date: 23 March 2018http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2018/606.html Related Fotheringhame v Nelson [2026] EWHC 632 (Ch) 27 March 2026. HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge). TLATA 1996 case concerning a post-separation change in intention, where the appellant also sought to recover outstanding child maintenance payments. KI v SI (Sham Trusts and Intervenor Proceedings in Financial Remedy Claims) [2026] EWFC 73 (B) Judgment of District Judge Hatvany at a preliminary issue hearing concerning the determination of whether purported trust deeds in favour of intervenors within financial remedy claims were shams. 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. Read the journal Financial Remedies Journal – 2026 Issue 2 | Summer Open in Related Fotheringhame v Nelson [2026] EWHC 632 (Ch) 27 March 2026. HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge). TLATA 1996 case concerning a post-separation change in intention, where the appellant also sought to recover outstanding child maintenance payments. KI v SI (Sham Trusts and Intervenor Proceedings in Financial Remedy Claims) [2026] EWFC 73 (B) Judgment of District Judge Hatvany at a preliminary issue hearing concerning the determination of whether purported trust deeds in favour of intervenors within financial remedy claims were shams. 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. Latest My Time on the Family Procedure Rule Committee The Vice Chair of the FRJ Editorial Board talks about his six years as a barrister member of the Family Procedure Rule Committee. Intervenor Cases: Preliminary Issue Hearing or FDR (or NCDR)? Should case management decisions in intervenor cases place greater focus on the opportunities presented by an FDR or NCDR taking place prior to a preliminary issue hearing? Standish One Year On – Is There Agreement As to What It Means? The question of whether property that is matrimonial property has as a consequence to be shared equally has become one of the main areas of debate in the first instance decisions over the last year. is curated by The Leaders In Family Law Books & Software EXPLORE OUR PRODUCTS
Fotheringhame v Nelson [2026] EWHC 632 (Ch) 27 March 2026. HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge). TLATA 1996 case concerning a post-separation change in intention, where the appellant also sought to recover outstanding child maintenance payments.
KI v SI (Sham Trusts and Intervenor Proceedings in Financial Remedy Claims) [2026] EWFC 73 (B) Judgment of District Judge Hatvany at a preliminary issue hearing concerning the determination of whether purported trust deeds in favour of intervenors within financial remedy claims were shams.
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.
Fotheringhame v Nelson [2026] EWHC 632 (Ch) 27 March 2026. HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge). TLATA 1996 case concerning a post-separation change in intention, where the appellant also sought to recover outstanding child maintenance payments.
KI v SI (Sham Trusts and Intervenor Proceedings in Financial Remedy Claims) [2026] EWFC 73 (B) Judgment of District Judge Hatvany at a preliminary issue hearing concerning the determination of whether purported trust deeds in favour of intervenors within financial remedy claims were shams.
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.
My Time on the Family Procedure Rule Committee The Vice Chair of the FRJ Editorial Board talks about his six years as a barrister member of the Family Procedure Rule Committee.
Intervenor Cases: Preliminary Issue Hearing or FDR (or NCDR)? Should case management decisions in intervenor cases place greater focus on the opportunities presented by an FDR or NCDR taking place prior to a preliminary issue hearing?
Standish One Year On – Is There Agreement As to What It Means? The question of whether property that is matrimonial property has as a consequence to be shared equally has become one of the main areas of debate in the first instance decisions over the last year.