header-logo header-logo

Family Law

28 June 2007
Issue: 7279 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Wood v Rost [2007] All ER (D) 198 (Jun)

(i) an agreement to compromise ancillary relief proceedings does not give rise to an enforceable contract. The agreement gains its authority from its subsequent approval by the court and incorporation into an order;

(ii) it is the duty of the parties and, more importantly, their professional advisers to ensure that orders are drawn up with care so as to ensure that they clearly provide for what the parties have agreed;

(iii) when a court is subsequently called upon to determine what was the true effect of an order the question is one of construction. The court will look at all the surrounding circumstances to give effect to its spirit and purpose;

(iv) the court’s power to correct errors in its orders is not confined to accidental slips and omissions (the “slip rule”).  It also has an inherent power to vary its own orders to make the meaning and intention of the order clear.

Issue: 7279 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll