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
The need for proportionality and the ‘Covid impact’
Simon Wilkinson, Parklane PlowdenThe Covid-19 pandemic has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. Within the courts and tribunals service there has been a plethora of guidance since March 2020 which...
Local authority input into private law proceedings, part II
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingsLucy Logan Green, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingThis article considers the interplay between private and public law proceedings, focusing on the law relating...
Time for change (II)
Lisa Parkinson, Family mediation trainer, co-founder and a Vice-President of the Family Mediators AssociationThe family law community needs to respond to the urgent call for change from the...
How Can I Wed Thee? – Let Me Change the Ways: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper on ‘Weddings’ Law (2020)
Professor Chris Barton, A Vice-President of the Family Mediators Association, Academic Door Tenant, Regent Chambers, Stoke-on-TrentThis article considers the Paper's 91 Consultation Questions...
Consultation on the proposed transfer of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of costs to the Legal Aid Agency
The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on the proposed transfer from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to the Legal Aid Agency of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of...
View all articles
Authors

Shadow directors beware: applying Prest in M v M

Sep 29, 2018, 18:55 PM
The recent decision of the High Court in M v M and Others [2013] EWHC 2534 (Fam), [2014] 1 (forthcoming and reported at [2013] Fam Law 1525) saw the award of £53m to the wife, an award thought to be the highest to date in a contested divorce. The case in
Slug : shadow-directors-beware-applying-prest-in-m-v-m
Meta Title : Shadow directors beware: applying Prest in M v M
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 4, 2013, 10:50 AM
Article ID : 104251

Olivia Buchan, Solicitor, Vardags:

The recent decision of the High Court in M v M and Others [2013] EWHC 2534 (Fam), [2014] 1 (forthcoming and reported at [2013] Fam Law 1525) saw the award of £53m to the wife, an award thought to be the highest to date in a contested divorce.  The case involved assets of over £107m and provides family lawyers with a lengthy and descriptive judgment applying the principles set out in the Supreme Court decision of Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] 2 FLR 732

M v M concerned an order for financial relief under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 made by the wife following an original petition, unaware that the courts of England and Wales had jurisdiction, for divorce in Russia. Throughout the judgment Mrs Justice King was unrestrained in her assessment of the husband's behaviour and character, stating that the case had 'been a fantastic charade with the husband a shady puppet master in the background'.

The issues considered in the M v M judgment include: orders for financial relief under Part III; failure to conduct full and frank disclosure; adverse inferences; assets held under a resulting trust/common intention constructive trusts; and the implied intentions of a shadow director.

The full version of this article appears in the December 2013 issue of Family Law.

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