A failure to disclose a material fact or document could justify setting aside a financial order, but whether or not the order will be set aside will depend on whether the information not disclosed would have made a fundamental difference to the order that was made. Non-disclosure that would not have impacted on the order will not be 'material' (Livesey (formerly Jenkins) v Jenkins). Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 9.9A provides for an application to set aside a financial remedy order. The FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, Pt 28 rules relating to costs do not apply to an application under FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955,

First, to obtain relief, the interference with the right of way must be substantial. It is also implicit within the scenario addressed in this Q&A that the parking is preventing the right of way from being substantially and practically exercised as conveniently as before. In this case, both the other dominant tenement owners and the servient tenement owners may apply for an injunction. In respect of an interim injunction, each would have to show that they fall within the well-established principles of American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd. Different

Where a tenancy has protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) the parties are free to negotiate terms for a new tenancy informally, but in the absence of any agreement, the terms would fall to be determined by the court. Although negotiations may take place on the basis of a new lease which is to be excluded from the security of tenure provisions of LTA 1954, if the landlord serves a section 25 notice, the proposals for a new tenancy to be included in the notice must be for the grant of a new tenancy

We have assumed that the squatter did not accrue at least 12 years’ adverse possession before 13 October 2003. Where land is registered and a squatter has not accrued at least 12 years’ adverse possession by 13 October 2003, the ‘new regime’ in the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) applies to any application by the squatter for title to the land. For guidance on what is required to establish adverse possession,

In answering this Q&A it has been assumed that it is a London-seated ad hoc arbitration conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) (rather than any institutional or other arbitration rules), and that the parties have not made any separate agreement in respect of costs. Further, it is assumed that the arbitrator has only asked for payment of their own costs (ie their fees and expenses) in advance. The requirement for payment in equal shares of an arbitrator’s fees and expenses in advance is usual in arbitration proceedings—essentially, this provides the tribunal with reassurance it will be paid for its role in resolving the dispute and prevent situations where an aggrieved party decides it’s not interested in paying its share if the tribunal holds against it in the substantive award. This can be particularly useful in ad hoc arbitrations

In family proceedings, service of documents is governed generally by Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 6. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.4 provides that service may be effected personally, by first class post, or other specified methods. Personal service is ordinarily effected by a process server, who will then swear an affidavit attesting to service. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.11 makes provision for the address of a solicitor to be provided for service. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.12 provides that a respondent may be served with orders at an address within the jurisdiction that has been given by the respondent for service. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.13 provides that where no solicitor address or other address has been given, and the applicant does not wish to

A periodical payments order is an order within financial remedy proceedings under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 or Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989 (together with a number of other, less usual statutory provisions) requiring one party to pay maintenance to the other for a fixed term or for joint lives. The court does not, however, enforce its own orders and, where there is a breach of an ordered obligation to pay maintenance, the receiving party may make an application to the court to enforce. The provisions in respect of enforcement are set out in the Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2010/2955, Pt 33, which apply the enforcement

Section 33 of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996) provides the court with the power to make an occupation order where the applicant has an estate or interest in property or has home rights. It is necessary to show that the applicant is entitled to occupy a dwelling-house by virtue of a beneficial estate or interest or contract, or by virtue of any enactment giving the right to remain in occupation; or

A petition for a decree of nullity is a petition seeking a declaration from the court that there was no valid marriage. The grounds for a decree of nullity to be granted are limited and fall into the void category—making the marriage a nullity ab initio—and voidable grounds, which allow for a decree of nullity if the facts alleged are proven (sections 11 and 12 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973)). A decree of nullity will mean that the marriage is treated as never having happened, save that the parties may still bring proceedings for financial remedies. For further guidance,

A financial order may be set aside on the basis of fraud, mistake, material non-disclosure, or a significant change of circumstance (often referred to as a ‘Barder event’ per Barder v Barder (Caluori Intervening)). An application to set aside is governed by the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 9.9A, which provides that an application must be made in accordance with FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, Pt 18 procedure, therefore, with an application notice and a draft of the order being applied for. If the original financial remedy order pre-dates 22 April 2014, then the application should be made to the Family Court. If the order post-dates

Is the third party (the bank) liable to repay any money already paid to the judgment creditor, considering CPR 72.9(3) and Lord Justice May's comments in the concluding summary paragraphs of Crantrave Ltd v Lloyds Bank plc? Is the judgment creditor liable to repay the party the hardship

A claim for an order for sale to enforce a charging order is made by issuing a Part 8 claim—for further guidance, see Practice Note: Order for sale—how to enforce a charging order. There does not appear