header-logo header-logo

Cracking financial assets on divorce

06 June 2019 / George Williamson , Katie Alexiou
Issue: 7843 / Categories: Features , Profession , Divorce , Family , Technology
printer mail-detail

Cryptocurrencies have added an additional layer of complexity to the division of matrimonial assets, say George Williamson & Katie Alexiou

  • Litigation funding can play an important role when it comes to getting the help and advice needed to prevent the financially stronger party from putting assets out of reach of the less fortunate spouse.

As if it wasn’t already challenging enough, cryptocurrencies have come along to make it that bit harder to identify and recover all the assets in financial proceedings on divorce.

Cryptocurrencies have been around since 2009 when Bitcoin was first released but have really entered mainstream consciousness in the last couple of years. There are now over 4,000 ‘altcoins’ or alternative versions of Bitcoin. Perhaps predictably, cases involving this type of asset are starting to filter through to divorce lawyers, presenting a new layer of complexity in the already painful process of disclosure and division of matrimonial assets.

Tracing ‘paper’

Although there will be a traceable record right at the outset of the transaction when

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll