Artwork

Content provided by Resolution. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Resolution or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

Resolution Podcast S3 Episode #9 | Maintenance and the Length of the Judge’s Foot | w/ Sally Harrison KC & Farhana Shazhady

52:51
 
Share
 

Manage episode 415194511 series 2906962
Content provided by Resolution. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Resolution or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

What is the correct approach to a maintenance case? Listen to Sally Harrison KC (St John’s Buildings) and Farhana Shahzady (Streathers Solicitors) tell us how it is done.

Sally reminds us of the guidance of Mr Justice Peel in WC v HC (Financial Remedies Agreements) (Rev1) [2022] EWFC 22 (22 March 2022)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2022/22.html

when thinking about the quantum of a maintenance order. Mr Justice Peel found that needs are an elastic concept, to be judged by reference to consideration of financial needs and obligations, whether there are children, and the age of the parties. We discuss how the length of the marriage really impacts on how much the standard of living is taken into account. Farhana reminds of guidance of Mr Justice Mostyn in SS v NS (Spousal Maintenance) (Rev 1) [2014] EWHC 4183 (Fam).

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2014/4183.html

Sally and Farhana discuss the distinction between cases involving wealthy families where the Court may well be inclined to make a Duxbury award, as opposed to need based income awards in the majority of cases. We discuss the overall impression that Courts are being quite restrictive on terms and quantum of maintenance at present.

When talking about capitalising maintenance awards, Sally wrestles with the discrepancy between the Ogden tables having a -0.25% rate of return in England & Wales, as opposed to Duxbury’s 3.75% rate of return after inflation of 3%.

Sally considers the following cases:

HC v FW [2017] EWHC 3162 (Fam) (29 November 2017)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2017/3162.html

Tattersall

Z (No.5) (Enforcement) [2024] EWFC 44 (04 March 2024)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2024/44.html

Farhana tells us why it is important to consider the impact of menopause, when considering maintenance quantum, term and nominal maintenance. She shares the details of her survey about the impact of maintenance in family law and financial remedy cases.

Resolution will be releasing a spousal maintenance handbook in Summer 2024. Please check the website for details.

  continue reading

31 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 415194511 series 2906962
Content provided by Resolution. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Resolution or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

What is the correct approach to a maintenance case? Listen to Sally Harrison KC (St John’s Buildings) and Farhana Shahzady (Streathers Solicitors) tell us how it is done.

Sally reminds us of the guidance of Mr Justice Peel in WC v HC (Financial Remedies Agreements) (Rev1) [2022] EWFC 22 (22 March 2022)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2022/22.html

when thinking about the quantum of a maintenance order. Mr Justice Peel found that needs are an elastic concept, to be judged by reference to consideration of financial needs and obligations, whether there are children, and the age of the parties. We discuss how the length of the marriage really impacts on how much the standard of living is taken into account. Farhana reminds of guidance of Mr Justice Mostyn in SS v NS (Spousal Maintenance) (Rev 1) [2014] EWHC 4183 (Fam).

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2014/4183.html

Sally and Farhana discuss the distinction between cases involving wealthy families where the Court may well be inclined to make a Duxbury award, as opposed to need based income awards in the majority of cases. We discuss the overall impression that Courts are being quite restrictive on terms and quantum of maintenance at present.

When talking about capitalising maintenance awards, Sally wrestles with the discrepancy between the Ogden tables having a -0.25% rate of return in England & Wales, as opposed to Duxbury’s 3.75% rate of return after inflation of 3%.

Sally considers the following cases:

HC v FW [2017] EWHC 3162 (Fam) (29 November 2017)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2017/3162.html

Tattersall

Z (No.5) (Enforcement) [2024] EWFC 44 (04 March 2024)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2024/44.html

Farhana tells us why it is important to consider the impact of menopause, when considering maintenance quantum, term and nominal maintenance. She shares the details of her survey about the impact of maintenance in family law and financial remedy cases.

Resolution will be releasing a spousal maintenance handbook in Summer 2024. Please check the website for details.

  continue reading

31 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Quick Reference Guide