- No exceptions to the ongoing involvement of the judge who hears the FDR (Shokrollah-Babaee v Shokrollah-Babaee)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
Family analysis: Alex Laing, barrister at Coram Chambers, considers the ‘unique’ and ‘deeply regrettable’ situation that arose in Shokrollah-Babaee v Shokrollah-Babaee, requiring Holman J to rule on whether a judge who conducted the financial dispute resolution (FDR) appointment during the earlier stages of financial remedy proceedings can later hear and rule upon disputed cross-applications in relation to the enforcement and/or variation of the substantive order made after a contested hearing in the proceedings for financial remedies.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial