header-logo header-logo

11 October 2013 / Robert Hines
Issue: 7579 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Revealing assets

istock_000017611994medium

Robert Hines on the family court’s approach to orders dealing with offshore assets

In January 2013, in the case of M v M [2013] EWHC 2534 (Fam), [2013] All ER (D) 133 (Aug), Mrs Justice King made a record £53m award to a Russian wife under Pt III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (Pt III). In reaching this decision, King J had to consider the recent landmark Supreme Court decision of Prest v Petrodel [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] All ER (D) 90 (Jun), in determining whether residential property owned by a number of companies could be transferred to the wife, notwithstanding the corporate veil.

Background

H and W are both Russian nationals, who met in 1987 when they worked in a factory together; H was a telephone technician and W worked in the cultural department. H and W starting living together in 1989 and they were married in 1991. There are four children of the family, although the oldest two (who are both over 18) are from the parties’ previous relationships. H

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’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
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
back-to-top-scroll