Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
UK Supreme Court has, today, handed down judgment in two appeals brought by ex-wives against divorce settlements following alleged material non-disclosure on the part of their ex-husbands - Gohil v Gohil  UKSC 61 and Sharland v Sharland  UKSC 60.
In Gohil, the Supreme Court re-instated the trial judge’s decision to set aside a financial order made in 2004 in divorce proceedings on grounds it had been obtained by material non-disclosure. In doing so it found the trial judge would have
found the ex-husband guilty of material non-disclosure even if he had referred only to the admissible evidence. It also considered there was no need to remit the issue of whether or not the non-disclosure was material given this would not involve
an ‘unavoidable injustice’ to the ex-husband.
In Sharland, the Supreme Court set aside a financial settlement consent order on grounds of fraud, stating that there was no ‘special magic’ about orders made in matrimonial proceedings which means that they are different to other court
orders when it comes to the effect of fraud.
The cases are of some interest to general dispute resolution lawyers (ie those who do not specialise in family law) due to the Supreme Court’s findings on various issues, including:
Family lawyers interested in wider points with implications for family lawyers and their clients and those interested in the key points from each judgment can read our post on our family blog here.
Click here for a free trial of Lexis®PSL.
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
Virginia specialises in general domestic and international commercial litigation, arbitration and alternative dispute resolution.
Virginia trained, qualified and practiced with Pinsent Masons before moving to Marriott Harrison where she continued in practice for a further seven years.
In practice, Virginia acted in a variety of general commercial disputes covering areas including intellectual property, fraud, defamation, misrepresentation, breach of contract, debt recovery, breach of restrictive covenants and company and shareholders’ disputes.
Virginia is Head of Dispute Resolution at Lexis®PSL and, when not focused on the strategic development and operational requirements of the Dispute Resolution module, her content work focuses on case management and evidence in civil litigation. She also regularly contributes to the LexisNexis Dispute Resolution Blog.
0330 161 1234