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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll