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
Re A, B and C (Children) [2021] EWCA Civ 451
(Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Macur, Baker, Arnold LJJ, 01 April 2021)Public Law Children – Fact finding – Lucas Direction – Sexual abuse allegations – Judge found...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
HMCTS launches updated online court and tribunal finder
HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has launched an updated version of its online court and tribunal finder tool to help those in search of a court, its location, opening times, disabled access...
NFJO publishes report on supervision orders in care proceedings
The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (NFJO) has published a report following its survey into the use of supervision orders in care proceedings. The survey focused on...
Villiers - the Anglo/Scottish perspective
Heard by the Supreme Court in December 2019, with its judgment last July, this case attracted much interest (or “lurid publicity” as per Mr Justice Mostyn in his judgement this week) as it...
View all articles
Authors

CB v EB [2020] EWFC 72

Nov 25, 2020, 18:43 PM
The husband’s application to set aside consent orders due to a fall in value of property was dismissed.
Slug :
Meta Title : CB v EB [2020] EWFC 72
Meta Keywords : inancial Remedies – Consent order – Application for set aside – Property values left husband with lower sums than anticipated – FPR 31F(6)
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 25, 2020, 00:00 AM
Article ID :

(Family Court, Mostyn J, 16 November 2020)

Financial Remedies – Consent order – Application for set aside – Property values left husband with lower sums than anticipated – FPR 31F(6) - Whether husband could apply to set aside the orders and for an adjustment of the division of assets

The husband’s application to set aside consent orders due to a fall in value of property was dismissed.


For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important Family Division, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and European courts case, subscribe to Family Law Reports.

Subscribers can log in here.

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of the Family Law Reports. Please quote: 100482.

 


 
Neutral Citation Number: [2020] EWFC 72 Case No: FD09D02020 
 
IN THE FAMILY COURT 
 
 
Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL 
 
Date: 16/11/2020 
 
Before : 
 

MR JUSTICE MOSTYN 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Between : 
 

CB Applicant

  - and -   

EB Respondent 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
Frank Feehan QC (instructed by Banks Kelly Solicitors Ltd) for the Applicant Annie Ward (instructed by Baker-Law LLP) for the Respondent 
 

Hearing dates: 4-5 November 2020 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Approved Judgment 

............................. 

 
MR JUSTICE MOSTYN 
 
This judgment was delivered in private. This anonymised version of the judgment may be published.  However, in no report of the case may the identities of the parties be revealed directly or indirectly.  Breach of this restriction will amount to a contempt of court.     

Judgment: CB v EB [2020] EWFC 72

Categories :
  • Financial Remedies
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from