Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
View all articles
Authors

ANCILLARY RELIEF: Everclear Ltd v Agrest and Kremen [2011] EWCA Civ 232

Sep 29, 2018, 18:14 PM
Slug : 2011EWCA232
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 18, 2011, 13:20 PM
Article ID : 94611

(Court of Appeal; Wall P, Sedley and Arden LJJ; 9 March 2011)

The husband and wife divorced in Israel. The wife had been granted leave to apply under Pt III of Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984. The husband had become a fugitive from English justice, having persistently and wilfully failed to maintain wife and children. The husband had transferred single share in BVI company to a third party

The applications to set aside transactions as shams or under s23 MFPA 1984 for intention to defeat the wife's claims.  The test for sham is a stiff one. Two of the transactions were set aside under s23, the other as a sham. The Court of Appeal upheld the orders

See also Kremen v Agrest [2011] EWHC 2571 and 3091 (Fam)

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Load more comments
Comment by from