header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 February 2024 / David Burrows
Issue: 8059 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Family
printer mail-detail

Potanina & the grant of permission without notice

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
158887
Are parties’ fundamental rights being overlooked by family courts? David Burrows delves into the weeds
  • What is the procedure for an English and Welsh resident to seek permission to apply for financial provision after a foreign divorce?
  • What must a respondent to an application for permission prove to set aside a successful without notice application for permission?

Procedure for a Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III application

The Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (MFPA 1984), Part III was introduced into family proceedings to enable a claimant spouse or civil partner to apply to the court for permission to apply for financial relief following an overseas family breakdown (MFPA 1984, s 13(1)). Much is left by the Act to rules of court. And it is mostly to the procedure set up under the Act that this article and its discussion of Potanina v Potanin [2024] UKSC 3 (31 January 2024) is devoted; for, as the Supreme Court points out in that case, the rules

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

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

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

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
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
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
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
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll