header-logo header-logo

08 September 2023
Issue: 8039 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 8 September 2023

Family proceedings

A v M [2023] EWHC 1900 (Fam), [2023] All ER (D) 96 (Aug)

The High Court, Family Division, upheld an application by both the applicant husband and respondent wife for a reporting restriction order (RRO), having dismissed an appeal by the husband. The husband and wife were separated. The husband’s companies had entered insolvent administration. It fell to be determined, among other things: (i) the test to be applied to an application to adduce fresh evidence under FPR 30.12(2)(b); (ii) whether the trial court had been incorrect in finding that any award would likely go the husband’s creditors; and (iii) whether an RRO should be granted. The court held that (i) the application for leave to adduce fresh evidence under FPR 30.12(2)(b) had been totally without merit; (ii) the previous judge’s findings that any large amount of outright capital would be attached by the husband’s creditors and the maintenance award were impregnable; and (iii) the request for redactions met the necessary standard that there had been a significant risk that,

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