Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles
Authors

FINANCIAL REMEDIES: Tchenguiz-Imerman v Imerman [2012] EWHC 4047 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:07 PM
Slug : financial-remedies-tchenguiz-imerman-v-imerman-2012-ewhc-4047-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 3, 2013, 09:06 AM
Article ID : 102793

(Family Division, Moylan J, 17 December 2012)

In heavily contested financial remedy proceedings the wife made an informal application for disclosure by the husband of certain communications in respect of which he claimed privilege. The wife claimed the information was relevant to the two central issues of whether certain family trusts were nuptial and whether the assets of those trusts were available or likely to be available to the husband.

The judge directed the wife to provide a list of communications she sought disclosure of including the company names and dates. The claim for privilege would follow the practice as set out in the CPR so that insofar as a claim for privilege was made in respect of any document or class of documents, or a part of a document, then it had to be stated in writing that there was such a right and the grounds on which that right was claimed. The grounds on which the right was claimed had to be sufficient to enable the wife to determine whether the right might, or could, be challenged.

 

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