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
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
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...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles
Authors

Kerman v Akhmedova [2018] EWCA Civ 307

Sep 29, 2018, 22:14 PM
Financial remedies – Procedure – Court attendance – Order requiring solicitor to give evidence – Anti-tipping off order – Appeal
The appeal brought by a solicitor in financial remedy proceedings against an order requiring him to provide evidence at court was dismissed.
Slug : kerman-v-akhmedova-2018-ewca-civ-307
Meta Title : Kerman v Akhmedova [2018] EWCA Civ 307
Meta Keywords : Financial remedies – Procedure – Court attendance – Order requiring solicitor to give evidence – Anti-tipping off order – Appeal
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 6, 2018, 09:25 AM
Article ID : 116388

(Court of Appeal, Sir James Munby P, Lewison, King LJJ, 27 February 2018)

Financial remedies – Procedure – Court attendance – Order requiring solicitor to give evidence – Anti-tipping off order – Appeal

The appeal brought by a solicitor in financial remedy proceedings against an order requiring him to provide evidence at court 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. 

Case No: B6/2016/4666
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWCA Civ 307
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION
Mr Justice HADDON-CAVE
[2016] EWHC 3349 (Fam)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL


Date: 27 February 2018
Before :

SIR JAMES MUNBY PRESIDENT OF THE FAMILY DIVISION
LORD JUSTICE LEWISON
and
LADY JUSTICE KING

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

Between :

Anthony David Kerman
Appellant

- and -

Tatiana Akhmedova
Respondent

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

Mr Phillip Shepherd QC and Miss Heather Murphy (instructed by Kerman & Co LLP) for the appellant
Mr Hodge Malek QC and Mr Dakis Hagen QC (instructed by Payne Hicks Beach) for the respondent


Hearing dates : 31 January-1 February 2018

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

Judgment


Judgment: 
Kerman v Akhmedova [2018] EWCA Civ 307.rtf
Categories :
  • Financial Remedies
  • Judgments
Tags :
FLR_cover
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from