header-logo header-logo

18 June 2009 / Geraldine Morris
Issue: 7374 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Inequitable to disregard

Geraldine Morris revisits the thorny issue of conduct & financial provision

The recent decision in C v T [2009] All ER (D) 43 (Jun) has led to media attention on the impact of conduct upon financial provision but practitioners should be wary; it remains that the circumstances in which conduct will impact upon financial provision are (or should be) extreme. The statutory provision in relation to conduct has been subject to considerable judicial interpretation. The House of Lords in Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] 2 FCR 213 (in relation to Miller) made its position on conduct clear and rejected the submission that conduct should impact upon the financial provision in that case.

In Miller Nicholls LJ stated (at para 65) “Parliament has drawn the line. It is not for the courts to re-draw the line elsewhere under the guise of having regard to all the circumstances of the case” and Baroness Hale went on to say (at para 145) that conduct would not be relevant “save in the most obvious and gross cases”

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

Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll