header-logo header-logo

05 August 2010 / James Riby
Issue: 7429 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

A life saver?

family_0_5

James Riby expounds on interim relief & the division of chattels

Interim applications in matrimonial finance proceedings regarding rights over property tend to be forgotten and unrequired by practitioners, save for applications for “maintenance pending suit” (MPS). These interim maintenance payments are designed to cover immediate living expenses, such as rent, mortgage and food, and can also cover funding for legal fees in certain “exceptional circumstances” which the courts have identified. They are designed to last until final agreement or final hearing, when the court has jurisdiction to make a range of property orders: lump sum; transfer of property (which can include sale); pension share; and long-term periodical payments. For many litigants MPS can be a financial life-saver, particularly at times like these of extreme pressure on court lists and judicial time.

Jurisdiction

The MPS jurisdiction appears enough for the interim needs of most cases but in others, albeit seemingly rarer, there is a need for the court to be able to make provision for other forms of interim relief.  Below are

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll