header-logo header-logo

Foreign affairs

28 July 2011 / Mariko Wilson , Kim Beatson
Issue: 7476 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Mariko Wilson & Kim Beatson examine financial relief following marital breakdown in an overseas jurisdiction

By virtue of Pt 3 of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (MFPA 1984), English Courts have the power to grant financial relief where a marriage has been dissolved or annulled or the parties have been legally separated in an overseas jurisdiction. The dissolution, annulment or legal separation must, however, be recognised as valid in England and Wales before MFPA 1984 can be invoked.

Part 3 of MFPA 1984 remedies the potential hardship suffered following an overseas divorce by enabling the Court to make Orders for financial provision including property adjustment, pension sharing, Orders for sale, interim Orders, avoidance of disposition Orders and transfers of tenancies.

Considerations for the Court

Before making any Order for financial relief, the Court has a duty to consider whether in all the circumstances of the case, it would be appropriate for such an Order to be made by a Court in England or Wales. The Court should also have

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll