header-logo header-logo

29 July 2020 / Daniel Lightman KC , Gregor Hogan
Issue: 7897 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

Unparalleled circumstances

25153
Daniel Lightman QC & Gregor Hogan revisit court orders in the light of COVID-19

In brief

  • Variations to final orders in the light of COVID-19 are more difficult than variations concerning compliance with a procedural step or a deadline.
  • The extent to which changed financial circumstances can be said to be the result of an assumed risk or the natural ebb and flow of asset values is key.
  • The possibility of COVID-19 constituting a Barder event in matrimonial proceedings has not yet been tested, but any such application will face significant challenges.

‘The coronavirus pandemic’, as Mr Justice Knowles noted in Melanie Stanley v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2020] EWHC 1622 (QB), ‘is generally recognised to be the greatest peacetime emergency that this country (and indeed, the world) has ever faced’. How should the courts respond to attempts to revisit decisions and orders in the light of such unparalleled circumstances? To what extent, if at all, should the judicial policies of legal certainty and finality

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll