header-logo header-logo

Divorce

23 October 2015
Issue: 7673 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Gohil v Gohil [2015] UKSC 61, [2015] All ER (D) 100 (Oct)

The Supreme Court allowed the wife’s appeal against an order setting aside an earlier order which had set aside part of a financial order which, by consent, had been made against the husband in favour of the wife. It held, among other things, that the principles propounded in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 3 All ER 745 had no relevance to the determination of an application to set aside a financial order on the ground of fraudulent non-disclosure.

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Solicitors are installing panic buttons and thumb print scanners due to ‘systemic and rising’ intimidation including death and arson threats from clients
Ministers’ decision to scrap plans for their Labour manifesto pledge of day one protection from unfair dismissal was entirely predictable, employment lawyers have said
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll