Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
A day in the life Of...
Read on

G v G [2015] EWHC 1512 (Fam)

Date:10 JUN 2015
Third slide
Law Reporter
(Family Division, Roberts J, 24 April 2015)

[The judicially approved judgment and accompanying headnote has now published in Family Law Reports [2016] 1 FLR 1314]

Financial Remedies – Appeal – Legal advice privilege – Allegation of non-disclosure – Evidence that the wife might have been aware of potential non-disclosure 2 years prior to application to appeal out of time

The full judgment is attached below

In 2010 a consent order was made in financial remedy proceedings achieving a clean break between the husband and wife.

In 2014 the wife sought permission to appeal out of time from the consent order alleging material non-disclosure by the husband. She claimed that she had not known that the husband rather than their three children was the primary beneficiary of two family trusts which had recently received payments amounting to £4m. The husband denied the allegations.

The wife issued an application seeking to prevent the husband’s legal team from continuing to act for him and a redaction of part of the husband’s evidence in the proceedings. The material consisted of an email suggesting that the wife was or might have been aware of potential issues of non-disclosure as long ago as 2012 but she failed to take any action for another 2 years. She further sought an injunction to prevent him from relying upon the use in the hearing of that material in respect of which she claimed legal advice privilege.

The husband sought a declaration that the material which the wife sought to exclude was not privileged and could be referred to as evidence in the proceedings.

The wife’s applications were dismissed. As a fact the judge found that there was no privilege attaching to either the email itself or the conversations which informed the content of the email. Even if there were there were no overriding circumstances which would justify the grant of injunctive relief on the basis of confidentiality to restrain the use of the information at the forthcoming hearing.

This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.

Case No: FD09D05089

Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWHC 1512 (Fam)

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 24/04/2015

Before :


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

Between :


- and -


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

Mr Martin Pointer QC and Mr Simon Webster (instructed by Messrs Farrer and Co) for the Applicant

Mr Andrew Green QC, Mr Tom Hickman and Mr Richard Sear (instructed by Messrs Pinsent Masons) for the Respondent

Hearing date: Friday 24th April 2015

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


G v G [2015] EWHC 1512 (Fam) 
Financial Remedies Handbook
Financial Remedies Handbook
Formerly entitled the Ancillary Relief Handbook...
Family Law Reports
Family Law Reports
"The unrivalled and authoritative source of...
Family Court Practice, The
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2020 edition due out in May