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 R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
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....
View all articles
Authors

Is there something I should know? Disclosure and non-disclosure in the family court: Part 1

Sep 29, 2018, 18:33 PM
family law, disclosure, panama papers, computation, mossack fonseca, hidden assets, non-disclosure, consent order
This is the first part of a two-part article about non-disclosure and the family court.
Slug : is-there-something-i-should-know-disclosure-and-non-disclosure-in-the-family-court-part-1
Meta Title : Is there something I should know? Disclosure and non-disclosure in the family court: Part 1
Meta Keywords : family law, disclosure, panama papers, computation, mossack fonseca, hidden assets, non-disclosure, consent order
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jul 25, 2016, 04:11 AM
Article ID : 112811
In NG v SG (Appeal: Non-Disclosure) [2011] EWHC 3270 (Fam), [2012] 1 FLR 1211 Mostyn J described non-disclosure as ‘the bane which strikes at the very integrity of the adjudicative process’ (para [1]). Without full disclosure, the court ‘cannot … lawfully and properly exercise its powers’ (Lord Brandon in Jenkins v Livesey (Formerly Jenkins) [1985] FLR 813, at 822) and is ‘thrown back on inference and guess-work within an exercise which inevitably costs a fortune and which may well result in an unjust result to one or other party’ (NG v SG, para [1]). As the Court of Appeal stated in Charman v Charman (No 4) [2007] EWCA Civ 503, [2007] 1 FLR 1246, at para [67], ‘the starting point of every inquiry in an application [for] ancillary relief is the financial position of the parties. The inquiry is always in two stages, namely computation and distribution; logically the former precedes the latter.’ How can a court proceed to distribute assets fairly if it has not been told what they are? On 14 October 2015 the Supreme Court decisions in Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60 and Gohil v Gohil [2015] UKSC 61 clarified the correct approach of the courts when faced with an application from a spouse, following an order made by consent, alleging non-disclosure by the other spouse. Since then, there has been press speculation that the leak of millions of documents from law firm Mossack Fonseca – the ‘Panama Papers’ – might precipitate applications to the courts concerning hidden assets.

This is the first part of a two-part article about non-disclosure and the family court. This first part sets out the nature and origin of the duty of disclosure, to whom it is owed, whether different criteria apply if parties are represented, the requirement of disclosure where agreement has been reached, the utility of a protective recital in a consent order, the routes of redress following a discovery of non-disclosure (set aside or appeal), the applicability of the Ladd v Marshall principles (fresh evidence on appeal), and the error into which the Court of Appeal fell in Gohil.

The full version of this article appears in the July 2016 issue of Family Law. 

Online subscribers can access the article here

For details on how you can subscribe to Family Law or any other titles, please contact a member of our sales team: Tel 0117 917 5100, or email: editor@jordanpublishing.co.uk
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
dominoes
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from