The following Family practice note Produced in partnership with Rebecca Dziobon of Penningtons Manches Cooper provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
This Practice Note is impacted by the exit of the UK from the EU on 31 January 2020. This has implications for practitioners, inter alia, when considering which courts have jurisdiction to determine a dispute. For guidance, see Practice Note: Brexit and family law. This Practice Note sets out the current position on pensions in family proceedings.
In proceedings for divorce, nullity, judicial separation or dissolution of a civil partnership, the court has the power to redistribute the benefits derived from pension resources between the parties.
Sections 25(2)(h) and 25B(1)(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) require the court to have regard to the benefits under a pension arrangement that, by reason of dissolution of annulment of the marriage, a party to the marriage will lose the chance of acquiring. MCA 1973, ss 25(2)(a) and 25B(1)(a) focus on the benefits that a party to a marriage has, or is likely to have. There are equivalent provisions in the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004).
Pension sharing is only available where the court will make a final decree, ie the court cannot make a pension sharing order in judicial separation proceedings. See Practice Note: Pensions and judicial separation.
Pension rights will often form the second largest asset upon marriage or civil partnership breakdown, after the family home, particularly if one of the parties has, for example, served as
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
This Practice Note examines:•why negative pledge clauses are used in commercial transactions •the consequences of breaching negative pledge provisions•how negative pledges are viewed in the context of security and quasi-security, and•key considerations when drafting a negative pledge clauseWhere
NOTE: This Practice Note is being reviewed in light of the changes to CPR 81 that will be introduced by the Civil Procedure (Amendment No 3) Rules 2020, SI 2020/747, which is available here. The changes to CPR 81 involve a substitution of the entirety of CPR 81, which will be renamed ‘Part 81
Coronavirus (COVID-19): The guidance detailing normal practice set out in this Practice Note may be affected by measures concerning process and procedure in the civil courts that have been introduced as a result of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The key implications for civil appeals are set
The offence of aggravated vehicle-takingA person is guilty of aggravated vehicle taking if:•they take a conveyance without the owner's or other lawful authority's consent for their own or another's use, or•knowing that any conveyance has been taken without such authority, drive it or allow
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.