A couple were recently told after their Divorce in a Family Court that the Court had unfortunately made a mistake which meant that their Decree of Divorce was “voidable”, and they risked charges of bigamy.
The administrative error occurred in 2013 and has now been rectified by a Senior Family Judge, who has hit out at the process saying that they were “victims of the Justice System”.
There are frequent transactions where clients give or receive large sums of money to their solicitors and it is now more important than ever to be vigilant and exercise appropriate caution.You may be buying or selling a property or indeed receiving monies from a family settlement or indeed receiving compensation monies.
The days of people regularly giving and receiving cheques are behind us and whereas few of us may have moved onto bitcoin transactions, most of us now rely on bank transactions and frequently giving and receiving bank account details where the amounts involved are higher than the amounts we daily use debit or credit cards for.
On the 4th November 2015, the Supreme Court gave its judgement in respect of the combined cases of Cavendish Square Holding -v- Talal El Makdessi and ParkingEye Ltd -v- Beavis 2015. The appeals gave the Supreme Court an opportunity to review the law on parking penalties as it has become something of a fraught area.
Barry Beavis, 47 from Chelmsford, Essex, is a Chip Shop owner who was pursing litigation clearly, as a matter of principle so far as he was concerned. He had also been the recipient of an £85 charge for breaching a 2 hour limit in April 2013, which he argued was “unfair and disproportionate”. He did not, in principle, dispute that he had overstayed a free parking period by nearly an hour.
Figures released on the 5th November 2015, show that cohabiting couples continue to the fastest growing family type in the UK in 2015.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS), have provided a Report showing that cohabiting couples in the UK have now reached 3.2 million. This in fact, represents an increase of nearly 30% between 2005 and 2015.
The Supreme Court has unanimously allowed the appeals of two ex-wives in the landmark cases of Sharland v Sharland and Gohil v Gohil.
In these two cases, the Supreme Court has made it clear that there will be zero tolerance for non-disclosure or indeed, dishonesty in financial proceedings arising from the breakdown of the marriage. In both of these cases, the former wives were seeking to have their divorce settlement set aside on the specific grounds of non-disclosure or dishonesty by their former husbands.
Message us via our Enquiry Form
