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
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
What is a Cohabitation Agreement, and do I need one?
Many couples, despite living together, never seek to legally formalise their living and financial arrangements.  They mistakenly believe that the concept of a ‘common law’ husband and...
View all articles
Authors

ANCILLARY RELIEF: A v B (Financial Relief: Agreements) [2005] EWHC 314 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:16 PM
Slug : a-v-b-financial-relief-agreements-2005-ewhc-314-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 17, 2005, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 87867

(17 January 2005; Black J; Family Division) [2005] 2 FLR 730

In considering what weight to give an agreement between the parties, it would be a mistake to treat Smith v Smith[2000] as altering the time honoured principles of Edgar v Edgar (1981) 2 FLR 19. It remained the case that an agreement should be taken into account under the heading of conduct, as one of the considerations to which the judge must give weight in applying the statutory criteria to the claim for ancillary relief. Although it was not the case that inherited property should be excluded from the ancillary relief exercise, in an appropriate case it was proper for the court to treat such property differently.

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