Matrimonial Finance: Shaping New Law into Solution-Focused Advice for Your Clients

  • Thu 24th June 2021 until Fri 29th October 2021
  • On-demand, United Kingdom
  • 5 hrs CPD

£149 + VAT

Book Now

  • Highly recommended

    Out of 15,684 evaluation forms, 96.54% said “Yes, I would recommend White Paper to a colleague

  • Watch on-demand

    All talks are pre-recorded, to the standard of a TV broadcast service, so you can watch on-demand, whenever suits you

  • Chatham House Rule

    So you get the best, most readily usable information our experts wouldn't share elsewhere

So you know what to expect, here is a clip of Nicholas Yates QC. Nicholas is answering the questions: How far can you push the Court over Maintenance Pending Suit applications? What is the latest judicial thinking on the duty to maximise earning capacity?

On-demand Programme

  1. Non-matrimonial property

    Cutting through all the noise, how has WX v HX [2021] changed existing thinking on what counts as non-matrimonial property?

    Answered by: Philip Cayford QC

    Philip is "one of the pre-eminent divorce silks. He comes with a weight of authority which gives immense confidence." His Supreme Court cases include Vince v Wyatt and Mills v Mills.

  2. Maintenance

    How far can you push the Court over Maintenance Pending Suit applications?

    What is the latest judicial thinking on the duty to maximise earning capacity?

    Answered by: Nicholas Yates QC

    Nicholas is "one of the best legal minds at the family Bar." "Exceptionally persuasive," "astonishingly good," "incredible on his feet," "charming and a pleasure to work with."

  3. Deferred lump sums

    How do you treat deferred lump sums and the probable future sale of a private company that is clearly a family asset, particularly when both spouses are employed by it and rely on it for income?

    Answered by: Sally Harrison QC

    Sally is an "absolute superstar." She is "one of a select few of the best mat finance QCs in the country." "Her submissions in the Supreme Court leave others standing."

  4. Variations

    Where is the wriggle room when varying the quantum and timing of payments or setting aside a lump sum and re-quantifying it on a Barder event basis?

    Answered by: Abigail Bennett of JMW Solicitors

    Abigail is a Deputy District Judge; she frequently sits in the most complicated money cases. "She is totally in command, knows everything and instils real confidence."

  5. Pensions

    Against a backdrop of recent and live cases, how are judges treating the PAG's report?

    What is the position over capital versus income, the "pension gap", and pre-acquired pensions?

    Answered by: Grant Lazarus

    Grant is one of the most experienced pensions ‘geeks' at the Bar. He wrote the PAG's paper on the risks of professional negligence claims arising from Pension Sharing or Offsetting.

  6. Schedule 1

    Given the under-reporting of schedule 1 cases, how do you steer clients through the twists and turns of (1) securing legal fees, (2) capitalisation of child maintenance, (3) holding of a property?

    Answered by: Samantha Hillas QC

    Samantha is "phenomenal - incredibly bright and incisive, and able to assimilate a vast amount of information." She acted for Mrs Gohil in the landmark Supreme Court case.

  7. Detrimental reliance

    How do you control - and overcome - the difficulties of establishing "detrimental reliance" in common intention constructive trust and "proprietary estoppel" claims?

    Answered by: Michael Horton QC

    Michael is "an absolute star" - "superb" - "his grasp of the law is phenomenal." He acted for the appellant in Villiers v Villiers [UKSC 2020] over an s. 27 maintenance application.

All speaker quotes are taken from Chambers Directory, Who’s Who Legal or Legal 500

Book Now

Additional clips from Matrimonial Finance

Sally Harrison QC on Deferred lump sums

Philip Cayford QC on Non-matrimonial property

Abigail Bennett on Variations

Grant Lazarus on Pensions

Samantha Hillas QC on Schedule 1

Michael Horton QC on Detrimental reliance

Top