header-logo header-logo

Justine Cadbury—Spratt Endicott

14 February 2017
Issue: 7735 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-detail
justine_cadbury_-_pr_image_2

Firm appoints matrimonial law barrister

Spratt Endicott Solicitors has strengthened its family law department with the recent appointment of specialist matrimonial barrister Justine Cadbury.

Justine, a highly respected figure in the field of family law, formerly practiced out of the leading matrimonial chambers Queen Elizabeth Building (QEB), in London, before moving to Oxfordshire. She spent 10 years working out of QEB, and brings with her a wealth of knowledge and experience across all aspects of family law.

Justine was called to the Bar by Middle Temple in 2001 before completing her pupillage at QEB, where she practiced as a barrister until 2011. Her work included representing clients at all levels, from tribunals to the magistrates’ court and the Court of Appeal. She has extensive experience of family law litigation, including cases that involved aspects such as complex financial arrangements, forces and services pensions, foreign property and UK-based and overseas trusts. She has also acted in a wide variety of private law children cases.

Justine said: “I am delighted to be joining Spratt Endicott’s family department. My busy practice at QEB gave me a very wide range of experience in all kinds of family law litigation, from complex financial disputes to emotionally charged Children Act cases, and gave me the privilege of working with some of the most distinguished practitioners in the field.”

“I am looking forward to using my experience to assist clients at Spratt Endicott. My approach is empathetic and pragmatic. I am very well attuned to the stress and upset that family disputes involve, and aim to achieve the most successful outcome for the client’s individual circumstances and help them move towards the future as positively as possible.”

Patrick Mulcare, director and head of family law at Spratt Endicott commented: “We are extremely pleased to have Justine join our department. As a firm of solicitors, it’s very unusual to bring in a barrister. Justine’s appointment helps to set us apart from others in the profession, augmenting our knowledge and skillset. Justine is originally from Banbury and has deep roots in the local area, which combined with her extensive knowledge of the full legal process, puts her in a wonderful position to help and advise our clients as they recognise both her capabilities and her empathetic approach.”

Issue: 7735 / Categories: Movers & Shakers
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll