header-logo header-logo

Setting aside (Pt II)

08 March 2013 / Margaret Hatwood
Issue: 7551 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family , Ancillary relief
printer mail-detail

Margaret Hatwood continues her examination of the increasing trend of parties asking for consent orders to be set aside

In Pt I of this two-part series, I looked at recent developments in the area of setting aside financial consent orders dealing with non-disclosure and fraud (see “Setting aside”, NLJ, 1 March 2013, p 229).

Part II covers situations involving new or supervening circumstances dealing with changes in asset values, death and remarriage.

Back to basics

Orders can, of course, be set aside where the whole factual basis on which the order was made has disappeared. In Barder v Caluori [1988] AC 20, [1987] 2 All ER 440 a consent order was made under which H was ordered to transfer his interest in the family matrimonial home to the wife. One of the primary reasons for this order was the wife had care of the children. Tragically, the wife killed the children and herself. On appeal to the House of Lords, the issue was whether leave to appeal

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—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll