header-logo header-logo

Matrimonial property

10 November 2011
Issue: 7489 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

AR v AR (ancillary relief: inheritance) [2011] EWHC 2717 (Fam), [2011] All ER (D) 241 (Oct)

In assessing a spouse’s income needs, in particular for the purposes of determining what income fund would be awarded, the analysis was a broad one. The court’s task when addressing that factor was not to arrive at a mathematically exact calculation of what constituted an applicant’s future income needs. It was to determine the notional annual income which, in the circumstances of the case, it would be fair for the spouse to receive. When justified by the circumstances of the case, a flexible application of the Duxbury calcuation in the manner, for example, identified in Dharamshi v Dharamshi [2001] 1 FCR 492, [2000] All ER (D) 2121, would better achieve justice with sufficient predictability than a more narrow approach.
 

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll