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

Setting aside executory orders: a terrible fate for Thwaite?

Sep 29, 2018, 22:02 PM
Family Law, financial remedies, setting aside executory order, Thwaite v Thwaite, Barder v Barder (Caluori intervening), SR v HR [2018] EWHC 606 (Fam)
This article looks at the authority of Thwaite in detail, examines whether it survived the decision in Barder, and considers two recent cases where Thwaite was relied on. It concludes by suggesting that Mostyn J in SR v HR [2018] EWHC 606 (Fam) was right to doubt the correctness of the decision in Thwaite and suggests it is time it was given a decent burial.
Slug : setting-aside-executory-orders-a-terrible-fate-for-thwaite
Meta Title : Setting aside executory orders: a terrible fate for Thwaite?
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : Yes
Prioritise In Trending Articles : Yes
Date : Jul 11, 2018, 05:00 AM
Article ID : 117262
Family lawyers have long used Thwaite v Thwaite (1981) 2 FLR 280 to argue that the court has the power to set aside or decline to enforce a financial remedy order which remains executory (ie wholly or partly unimplemented) and where it would be inequitable for the order to remain in place or be enforced. Yet this makes no sense. The cure for an unimplemented order is implementation, not tearing it up and going back to square one. This supposed power to interfere with executory orders was unnecessary for the decision in Thwaite. The cases relied on in Thwaite provided no support for it. If it was that simple, we would have no such thing as a Barder event, as the order was executory in Barder v Barder (Caluori intervening) [1987] 2 FLR 480.

Michael Horton's article in the July 2018 issue of Family Law ([2018] Fam Law 884) looks at the authority of Thwaite in detail, examines whether it survived the decision in Barder, and considers two recent cases where Thwaite was relied on. It concludes by suggesting that Mostyn J in SR v HR [2018] EWHC 606 (Fam) was right to doubt the correctness of the decision in Thwaite and suggests it is time it was given a decent burial.
The full version of this article appears in the July 2018 issue of Family Law

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of Family Law journal. Please quote: 100482.
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
questions
Provider : Coram Chambers
Product Bucket :
Load more comments
Comment by from