The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
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...
Meta Title :Excessive costs and J v J: a practitioner response (£)
Meta Keywords :family law, J v J  EWHC 3654 (Fam), procedural rule changes, legal costs
Canonical URL :
Trending Article :
Prioritise In Trending Articles :
Jan 16, 2015, 05:29 AM
Article ID :108251
The recent judgment of Mr
Justice Mostyn in the North West of England case J v J  EWHC 3654 (Fam) raises some important issues for the
family legal profession. There are many matters dealt within the judgment which
are reminders and, in this instance, stern reminders of those areas where
practice lags behind recent or not so recent procedural rule changes. There are
others opined upon by His Lordship which practitioners, including this author,
might find hard to accept as valid or an acceptable appraisal of the current
approach of practitioners to the court process and their legal costs
relationship with their clients. There are other views expressed by
Mostyn J which, with respect, some will regard as simply wrong. The full version of this article appears in the January 2015 issue of Family Law.