Rhys Taylor, 36 Family and 30 Park PlaceJonathan Galbraith, Mathieson Consulting2020 has thus far proved to be a memorable year for all the wrong reasons, but nonetheless it remains an interesting one...
Peter Mitchell QC, 29 Bedford RowStock Options and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) are frequently encountered by the Family Court when dividing property on divorce or dissolution of a Civil Partnership....
The wife was granted permission to withdraw her current divorce petition and issue a fresh one in order to anchor the date for domicile and habitual residence and further orders for maintenance pending suit were made.
The husband and wife were married for 42 years. The wife, who had no independent means, lived in England and Wales and initiated divorce proceedings there while the wealthy husband claimed to be living in Malaysia and brought proceedings there. The issue of jurisdiction was scheduled to be heard later in the year but the wife applied for maintenance pending suit and also for permission to issue a fresh divorce petition in order to anchor the date for which domicile and habitual residence were decided which she argued would eliminate areas of dispute from the jurisdiction proceedings. The wife was granted permission to withdraw her petition and issue fresh proceedings.
The judge further ordered the wife be paid £35,000 pm pending the jurisdiction hearing, £60,000 to cover the costs of further negotiations and £30,000 pm for legal costs. The wife’s application for an order for £115,000 to discharge her outstanding legal costs was refused.
The fully referenced, judicially approved judgment and headnote will appear in a forthcoming issue of Family Law Reports. A detailed summary and analysis of the case will appear in Family Law. __________________________________________________________________
Neutral Citation Number:  EWHC 1519 (Fam) No. FD13D00747 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FAMILY DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice
1st May 2014
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE HOLMAN (sitting throughout in public)
PAULINE SIEW PHIN CHAI Petitioner
- and -
TAN SRI DR KHOO KAY PENG Respondent
MR R. TODD QC and MR N. YATES (instructed by Vardags) appeared on behalf of the petitioner. MR T. BISHOP QC, MRS R. BAILEY-HARRIS and MISS K. COOK (instructed by Payne Hicks Beach) appeared on behalf of the respondent.