WIFE WINS LEGAL BATTLE FOR GOLD BULLIONS IN DIVORCE SETTLEMENT

Following the recent payout by EuroMillions lottery winner, Nigel Page, which saw ex-wife Wendy Page walk away with £2 million of her ex-husbands winnings, multi-millionaire and entrepreneur Peter Brandon has lost a similar suit after ex-wife Christina Brandon received £2.4 million.

Mr Justice Ryder, sitting in the High Court, heard how several gold bullion bars valued at £62, 000 had been smuggled out of Austria by Mr Brandon’s Grandfather during the 1930s and brought into the United Kingdom. 

In response to his ex-wife’s claim for ancillary relief, Mr Brandon stated that the gold bars had gone missing following his departure from the matrimonial home.  In failing to entertain Mrs Brandon’s claim for ancillary relief, it was Mr Brandon’s case that the gold bars had simply disappeared and could have been taken by anybody.

Mr Brandon, who has since re-married and emigrated to Florida, went so far as to say that he was in fact surviving on £2,000 each month and could not possibly afford a large settlement to his ex-wife, who continues to live in the former matrimonial home, worth an estimated £2 million.

During the proceedings which had followed the breakdown of the couple’s marriage, the gold bars had been ‘lying around’ the couple’s 11 bedroom mansion in Buckinghamshire. 

In July 2010, Mr Justice Ryder, sitting in the High Court, commented on Mr Brandon’s dishonesty and failure to disclose significant assets throughout the course of the proceedings.  The Court found that Mr Brandon had attempted to conceal significant wealth such as secret Swiss bank accounts, before ordering a settlement of £2.4 million in favour of Mrs Brandon. 

Lord Justice Thorpe, dismissing Mr Brandon’s appeal, ruled that whilst there was a possibility the ruling was unfair, the decision was acceptable given Mr Brandon’s dishonest conduct throughout the proceedings.

How can Hanne & Co help you?

Hanne & Co is one of London’s leading family law firms.  Our specialist family law team have decades of experience in a wide range of family law disputes.

It may be that you have recently separated from your spouse and seek specialist advice on your finances.  Alternatively, if you separated from your spouse some time ago, you should bear in mind that until your finances are concluded, one party to the marriage can still claim against the other.  In the event that you are in the middle of ancillary relief proceedings, you may require specialist advice as to your obligations to disclose assets and income.

Ancillary relief is a complex area of law and it is essential that you obtain advice from an experienced solicitor.  Our specialist Private Law team at Hanne & Co are here to help and advise you on any issues arising from the breakdown of your relationship.  In the event that you were never married, we are able to advise on issues of cohabitation, trusts and property.  Each of our experienced solicitors are able to offer fixed fee appointments at competitive prices. 

Hanne & Co also have an experienced Private Law team with over a century of experience in family law proceedings and we are able to assist you every step of the way and at each stage of the legal process in family law disputes.

Please feel free to enquire with one of our team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website www.hanne.co.uk, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch. 

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading law firm based in Clapham Junction. Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation. As well as services in Family we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Employment Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime. We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk. You can also find out more about us at our website www.hanne.co.uk or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

COURT RULES ON HIDDEN MILLIONS IN ANCILLARY RELIEF CASE

Ancillary relief and divorce lawyers are saying farewell to the 'Hildebrand' rules following a Court decision earlier this year ruling that a millionaire husband should be allowed to hide his fortune.

On the 29th July 2010 the Court of Appeal dismissed the longstanding practice following on from Hildebrand v Hildebrand [1992] 1 FLR 244 that it was fair game to take copies of any documents found by a party during divorce proceedings that provided evidence that the other party had undisclosed assets such as bank accounts or property on the basis that the ­originals were then promptly returned to the other party or their solicitors. Finding in favour of Mr Imerman, the Court concluded that the so-called Hildebrand rules’ were not authority for such established practice.  The Judge’s concluded that Hildebrand is only authority ‘as to the time when copies obtained unlawfully or clandestinely should be disclosed to a spouse’. It is only on that narrow point that the rule in Hildebrand was and remains good law. The Court ordered that the wife in this case, Lisa Tchenguiz, could not use the many documents she had managed to obtain from her husbands private files and must instead deliver the obtained files to Mr Imerman’s solicitors (and retain no copies) and that she and her solicitors be restrained from using any information they might have gained from reading the files.

TCHENGUIZ V IMERMAN AND IMPROPERLY OBTAINED EVIDENCE IN DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS

Mr Imerman and Ms Tchenguiz married in 2001, and signed a pre- nuptial agreement at the alleged insistence of Ms Tchenguiz. Mr Imerman, dubbed ‘the man from Del Monte’ owned a large stake in Del Monte foods Ltd, which he sold for 380 million in 1999, 2 years prior to his marriage to Ms Tchenguiz.

The wife filed for divorce in 2008. By this time the husband’s wealth had increased further and the wife claimed that she could no longer be expected to settle for the agreed amount from the earlier pre-nuptial agreement. She therefore issued her claim for ancillary relief.  As proceedings continued Ms Tchenguiz claimed that her husband had told her she would “never be able to find my money” and that his fortune was “well hidden”. She claimed that the disclosures that he made on his form E were not correct and that she could prove that he had considerable undisclosed assets.

 It just so happened that Ms Tchenguiz’s brother shared a work and office computer system with Mr Imerman. It was suggested that he, along with other members of the wife’s family, accessed Mr Imerman’s full computer files and downloaded between 250,000 and 1.5million pages of documents that they then handed over to Ms Tchenguiz’s divorce lawyers. Mr Imerman launched an immediate application to the Court to have the documents retrieved; claiming that they were confidential documents, and were improperly obtained by the wife and her legal team.

 In the Queen's Bench Division, Eady J gave summary judgment in the husbands favour and granted him an injunction against the brothers and their solicitor (a) requiring them to return all copies of the documents to H and (b) against disclosing anything obtained from the server to any third party, including Wife and her solicitors. In the Family Division, Moylan J ordered that W's matrimonial solicitors return the files to H to enable him to check them for privileged material but no more. After that check, they were to be returned to Wife’s solicitors. There were conjoined cross appeals.

 In the Court of appeal Ms Tchenguiz sought to rely on the “Hildebrand rules”, dating to 1992, under which both parties are allowed to obtain copies of confidential information from their spouse, as long as they do not use force.

However, The Court of Appeal dismissed her application and rejected use of ‘Hildebrand’ stating that it had no legal basis in this case. It was ordered that the wife was to deliver the files to the Husbands solicitors and retain no copies, so that they may then properly advise him as to his disclosure obligations.

How can Hanne & Co help you?

Hanne & Co are one of London’s leading family law firms.  Our specialist family law department possesses decades of experience in complex ancillary relief proceedings.  Following the Court of Appeal ruling in Imerman, it is likely that parties will have to seek expert advice  in respect of ­improperly obtained documents whilst ensuring that their best interests are protected and pursuing their entitlement to full and frank disclosure during ancillary relief proceedings.  

Our invaluable experience in ancillary relief proceedings can assist anyone seeking advice on ancillary relief settlements where they suspect non-disclosure of assets has occurred, or where they are seeking to defend themselves against use of confidential or private information. We possess decades of invaluable experience in all areas of ancillary relief proceedings as well as other areas of Family Law such as Cohabitation, Children, Adoption and Public Law.  We are in a position to advise you accordingly.

Please feel free to enquire with one of our family law team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website http://www.hanne.co.uk/, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch.

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading South London firm based in Clapham Junction.  Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation.  As well as services in Family we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Employment Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime.  We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk.  You can also find out more about us at our website http://www.hanne.co.uk/ or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

LOTTERY WINNER PAYS EX-WIFE £2 MILLION SETTLEMENT

It was reported on 22^nd November 2010 that EuroMillions lottery winner, Nigel Page, who scooped a jackpot of £56 million earlier this year, has opted to settle a legal dispute from his ex-wife, who left him 10 years ago.

Wendy Page, a former Human Resources director, sought to claim £8 million from Mr Page after a £1 million offer from Mr Page’s solicitors was rejected. 

The couple have since reached an out of court settlement amounting to £2 million.  Mrs Page is also thought to have won a huge increase in maintenance payments for the couple’s 13 year old Daughter.  It is reported that payments to be made by Nigel Page to his wife have increased dramatically from £150 per month to £2000 per month following his win earlier in the year.

Family law practitioners have said it is unlikely that Mr and Mrs Page had concluded their financial affairs during their divorce.  It is argued that had the couple concluded their financial affairs with a consent order providing for a clean break, Mr Page would have had little, if any, obligation to settle the dispute with his ex-wife.

Having practiced family law for over 25 years, Sue Harlow heads the family department at  Hanne & Co.  This is the firm’s largest department handling many complex family matters.  Today, the department is one of the largest and most prestigious in South London. 

Sue specialises in financial and property settlements within divorce cases as well as niche areas of ancillary relief.  Sue has acted in a many high profile family matters and previously acted in the case of Grimes v Grimes [2003] EWCA Civ 1814.  This case is well reported and involved the confiscation of a assets by Customs and Excise at the same time as an application for ancillary relief.

How can Hanne & Co help you?

Hanne & Co is one of London’s leading family law firms.  Our specialist family law team have decades of experience in a wide range of family law disputes.  Perhaps you have recently separated and seek specialist legal advice on your finances? Perhaps you separated from your spouse or partner some time ago but did not conclude any financial matters? Either way, you should bear in mind that until your finances are completely concluded, one party to the marriage may still claim against the other and should you receive an additional income at some point in the future, you too could face an ancillary relief claim from an estranged spouse.  It is therefore important that you seek legal advice when considering a divorce and furthermore, address financial matters with your solicitor.

Ancillary relief is a complex area of law and it is essential that you obtain advice from an experienced solicitor.  Our specialist Private Law team at Hanne & Co are here to help and advise you on any issues arising from the breakdown of your relationship.  In the event that you were never married, we are able to advise on issues of cohabitation, trusts and property. 

Hanne & Co also have an experienced Private Law team with over a century of experience in private family law proceedings and we are able to assist you every step of the way and at each stage of the legal process in family law disputes.

Please feel free to enquire with one of our team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website www.hanne.co.uk, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch. 

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading law firm based in Clapham Junction. Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation. As well as services in Family we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Employment Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime. We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk. You can also find out more about us at our website www.hanne.co.uk or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS UNDER THE EQUALITY ACT 2010

There appears to be a significant flaw in the new Equality Act 2010, in particular, relating to compromise agreements.

These agreements have, quite rightly, been subject to careful regulation as their purpose is essentially to prevent an employee from bringing claims against his or her employer, usually in return for a sum of money.

Section 144 of the Act makes compromise agreements void unless they fall into one of the exceptions listed in Section 147(3).  One of these exceptions is met if the employee has received independent legal advice from a lawyer or trade union representative and they have "signed off" the agreement.  The Act says, however, that any lawyer previously advising the employee is not an independent lawyer for these purposes and is therefore precluded from advising and signing off the compromise agreement.  The same applies if the solicitor has acted in any way for the employer during the course of the complaint.  This is a nonsense and clearly not what was intended.  Unfortunately, a straight forward reading of the Act produces this result.

What to do? The consensus amongst employment lawyers is that any Court or Tribunal will have a purposive interpretation of this section and this means that they will read into it, the intention of Parliament when passing the legislation.  In addition, this provision only affects discrimination claims and if the agreement is reached through ACAS, then the problem does not arise.  And so, it would appear to be a 'storm in a tea cup', yet if anything, provides for a clear demonstration of the sloppy manner in which contemporary legislation can be scrutinised.

How can Hanne & Co help you?

Hanne & Co provide a bespoke service to both employers and employees.  Our experience employment law team offer specialist advice on compromise agreements.

Hanne & Co offers an employers a competitive fixed fee of between £600 and £1000 to draft a compromise agreement.

Partner and Notary Public, David Taylor, heads the firm's employment law department and has over 30 years experience in handling complex issues of employment law, having conducted his first tribunal in 1977.  David has acted in many significant employment law disputes, representing both employers and employees.

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading law firm based in Clapham Junction. Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation. As well as services in Employment Law, we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Family Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime. We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk. You can also find out more about us at our website www.hanne.co.uk or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

CAFCASS: UNFIT FOR PURPOSE?

On 11^th November 2010, Chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Margaret Hodge, criticised CAFCASS, the body responsible for looking after the interests of vulnerable children in the family courts.  CAFCASS was described as being “not fit for purpose”.  It was concluded that the service was dealing with “a legacy of low morale, unacceptably high levels of staff sickness and under-performance.” 

The Public Accounts Committee said that CAFCASS (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service have “failed to get to grips with fundamental weaknesses in its culture, management and performance” following a 34% increase in its caseload, leading “chaos across the family justice system”.  The service was criticised for its response to the increase in cases following the death of Baby P, now known as, Peter Connolly.

Many professionals working in the Family Justice System are aware of the systematic failings, bullying and inadequate managerial system at CAFCASS and it is thought that the services substandard approach has resulted in the departure of experienced professionals away from the service.  CAFCASS have learnt a very expensive mistake which has lead to the most vulnerable children in society receiving a poor service and the service finds itself in the midst of negative publicity following the conclusions drawn by the Public Accounts Committee on 11^th November 2010.

Caroline Little, an experienced consultant at Hanne & Co has over 30 years experience in family law and has been a member of the Children Panel since 1985.  Caroline represents children, parents and other family members in complex and lengthy family law matters.  Caroline’s experience covers both Private and Public family law.

Caroline has been a member of the Association of Lawyers for Children for 20 years and sat on the executive committee for 10 years.  Caroline also sat as co-chair of the Association of Lawyers for Children for over 3 years and maintains a heavy involvement in the Family Justice Council, currently sitting on the Safeguarding and Voice of the Child subcommittees.

Caroline recently discussed her views on CAFCASS with leading news provider, ITN, in the wake of the Public Accounts Committee report.  Caroline has an established reputation across London’s legal community and her vast experience in family law often attracts the most complex of disputes.

You can read more about the Public Accounts Committee and the criticisms of CAFCASS here:

www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed71348

www.familylaw.co.uk/articles/Cafcass11112010-5642

How can Hanne & Co help you?

Hanne & Co is one of London’s leading family law firms.  Our specialist family law team have decades of experience in a wide range of family law disputes.  It may be that you are currently involved in family law proceedings and have questions regarding the involvement of CAFCASS.  In light of the recent Public Accounts Committee report, you may wish to seek legal advice as to the role of CAFCASS and the weight which could be attached to any conclusions drawn.  Our specialist Public Law team at Hanne & Co consisting of experienced lawyers; Lorna Cservenka, Jackie Pearce, Michael Brierley and Samantha Cook, and consultants, Caroline Little and Paulena Panayiotou, are here to help and advise you on any such issues.  In the event that you are currently involved in private law proceedings, Hanne & Co also have an experienced Private Law team with over a century of experience in private family law proceedings and we are able to assist you every step of the way and at each stage of the legal process in family law disputes.

Please feel free to enquire with one of our team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website www.hanne.co.uk, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch. 

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading law firm based in Clapham Junction. Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation. As well as services in Family Law, we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Employment Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime. We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk. You can also find out more about us at our website www.hanne.co.uk or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

LANDMARK JUDGMENT HIGHLIGHTS ISSUES SURROUNDING THE USE OF ALCOHOL HAIR STRAND TESTING IN FAMILY LAW

Judgment has been handed down in a landmark ruling of the High Court highlighting the issues surrounding the use of alcohol hair strand testing in family proceedings. 

Lorna Cservenka of Hanne & Co represented the mother in the proceedings. She recently took part in a live webcast discussing the issues raised by Alcohol hair strand testing in family proceedings. 

Lorna joined Hanne & Co in 2005 and became a partner at the firm in 2010.  Lorna is the head of the Public Law department at Hanne & Co and possesses invaluable experience in dealing with Local Authorities.  Lorna can advise on care proceedings and complex issues of Public Law.

The Judgment in LB Richmond v B & W [2010] EWCA 2903 can be summarised as follows;

(i)                 An alcohol test can only tell the court whether there has been an excessive consumption of alcohol of more than 60 grams per day over a prolonged period of time.  This amounts to approximately 7-8 units per day or just under a bottle of wine / 2-3 pints of lager.

(ii)               An alcohol test cannot be used to prove abstinence.  Hair strand tests cannot differentiate between those who are abstinent and those who consume alcohol socially.

(iii)             An alcohol test cannot be used to determine the amount of alcohol consumed at a particular point in time.

(iv)              It is not scientifically sound to segment hair into monthly sections.  This is because of the manner in which alcohol markers are secreted into the hair and only an average level can be taken from sections of hair which are 3 cm long.  It is not possible to prove a chronology of alcohol consumption or a pattern of drinking.  Hair strand tests which purport to determine monthly use are not approved by the Society of Hair Strand Testing.

(v)                You must use both an EtG test and an FAEE test to reduce the possibilities of false positives and false negatives.

Hair strand testing is frequently used in family law proceedings to determine alcohol and drug use.  Hair strand testing is often significant in both private and public law proceedings and therefore it is vital that the correct weight is attached to any results obtained. 

The judgment in LB Richmond v B & W [2010] EWCA 2903 will no doubt have a significant impact on leading hair strand testing companies such as Trichotech and Trimega Laboratories.

Read the full judgment here: http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed71271

How can Hanne & Co help you?


Hanne & Co is one of London’s leading family law firms.  Our specialist family law team have decades of experience in a wide range of family law disputes.  It may be that you are currently involved in family law proceedings directing the use of hair strand testing.  In light of the judgment in LB Richmond v B & W [2010] EWCA 2903, you may wish to seek legal advice as to the weight which can be attached to any results obtained.  Our specialist Public Law team at Hanne & Co consisting of experienced lawyers; Lorna Cservenka, Jackie Pearce, Michael Brierley and Samantha Cook, and consultants, Caroline Little and Paulena Panayiotou, are here to help and advise you on any such issues.

Please feel free to enquire with one of our team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website www.hanne.co.uk, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch. 

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading law firm based in Clapham Junction. Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation. As well as services in Family we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Employment Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime. We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk. You can also find out more about us at our website www.hanne.co.uk or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

GOVERNMENT TO MAKE LEGAL AID CUTS

The Government has announced major changes to the system of civil legal aid in England and Wales.

Speaking in the Commons, Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke announced that civil legal aid would only be routinely available in cases where life or liberty is at stake. 

Funding for a wide range of disputes, including some divorce cases and clinical negligence would be axed.

The proposals are intended to cut the legal aid bill by £350 million a year by 2015 and there would be approximately 500,000 fewer civil cases as a result of the changes.

How can Hanne & Co help you?

Hanne & Co is one of London’s leading law firms.  Our specialist civil team members have decades of experience in family, employment and housing matters.    Our invaluable experience can assist anyone seeking advice on such issues. As a firm used to conducting cases under legal aid we know how to run a case professionally but proportionately so the potential gains do not outweigh the legal costs. 

Please feel free to enquire with one of our team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website www.hanne.co.uk, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch.

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading law firm based in Clapham Junction. Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation. As well as services in Family we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Employment Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime. We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk. You can also find out more about us at our website www.hanne.co.uk or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

MILLIONAIRE HUSBAND ORDERED TO PAY HIS EX-WIFE AN EXTRA £481,000

On 4th November 2010 Judges in the Court of Appeal case of Kingdon v Kingdon dismissed Simon Kingdon’s appeal, ordering him to pay an extra £481,000 following their divorce settlement in April 2005. The court found that Mr Kingdon, a former Financial Director of West Bromwich Building Society and city financier, had deliberately hidden information from his ex-wife about a share-holding in Money Partners Holdings Ltd (“MPHL”) that eventually made him £1.2million.

The unanimous ruling of the three panel Court of Appeal indicates that where material non-disclosure of assets have occurred the court has the discretion to deal with the case justly and proportionately by ordering an enlargement of the previous order. The court is entitled to assume that in the absence of strong evidence to the contrary that the husband could still reasonably make the extra payment.

The Kingdon Case on Non-Disclosure of Assets

The parties separated in 2003 after a long marriage of 23 years. They had three children. During the marriage the wife’s main role had been as wife, mother and home-maker. She also worked at times as a legal executive.

The husband is a chartered accountant and had a successful career in financial services. At the time of the separation he was the finance director of Kensington Group PLC (“KG”) and was earning about £350,000 p.a. inclusive of bonus. In 2003-04 he made £1.7million as a result of his exercise of share options in KG and of immediate sale of the shares. In October 2004 the husband became a finance director of MPHL, a private company. By that time the parties had exchanged disclosure of their financial assets. In April 2005 the parties agreed that they would resolve their finances on the basis of a clean break. The wife was awarded an equal division of their assets and an additional payment was made to her by the husband of £200,000. This agreement was reached without the husband disclosing to the wife that in July 2004 he had acquired £200,000 of shares in MPHL. In 2006 the husband sold those shares netting £1,268,000.

The Court of Appeal found that ‘the husband had been guilty of deliberate, substantial and protracted non-disclosure’. They unanimously awarded his ex-wife £481,000, a 35% share of the net gain acquired from the sale of the shares. The court dismissed the husband’s argument that because he had suffered losses on the stock market and a diminution of capital that should deflect the court from making the order of additional payment.

How can Hanne & Co help you?

Hanne & Co is one of London’s leading family law firms. Our specialist family law team has decades of experience in complex ancillary relief proceedings. Following the Court of Appeal ruling in Kingdon, it is likely that ex-spouses will seek legal advice following a settlement of finances where it later emerges one party has failed to make full and frank disclosure. Our invaluable experience in ancillary relief proceedings can assist anyone seeking advice on such financial settlements.

Please feel free to enquire with one of our family law team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website www.hanne.co.uk, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch.

About the firm

Hanne & Co is a leading South London firm based in Clapham Junction. Established in 1898 we have a long history and outstanding reputation. As well as services in Family we are experts in Property (residential and commercial), Private Client and Wills, Employment Law, Housing, Landlord and Tenant and Crime. We have a thriving practice with our staff dedicated and committed to providing a quality service at competitive rates.

For further information please contact us at +44 (020) 7228 0017, or contact us through info@hanne.co.uk. You can also find out more about us at our website www.hanne.co.uk or visit our wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_Hanne_&_Co

SUPREME COURT BACKS PRE-NUPTIAL AGREEMENTS

On 20th October 2010, Judges in the Supreme Court case of Radmacher v Gratino made a landmark ruling in favour of Pre-Nuptial Agreements by a majority of 8 to 1.  The test case related to high cost ancillary relief proceedings between German paper industry heiress, Karin Radmacher, worth an estimated $100 million, and her ex-husband, Nicholas Gratino.  


The ruling from the Supreme Court indicates that Pre-Nuptial Agreements are now as enforceable as Separation Agreements and Post-Nuptial Agreements and subject to the same safeguards.  The judicial position in this regard is now in line with that of the United States, France and Germany, all of whom recognise the binding nature of Pre-Nuptial Agreements.


What is a Pre-Nuptial Agreement?


A Pre-Nuptial Agreement is a contract entered into by parties before marriage with a view to establishing the division of finances in the event of separation.  Whilst the existence a Pre-Nuptial Agreement was not previously held as binding and could be upheld at the discretion of the Court, the decision in the test case of Radmacher on Pre-Nuptial Agreements, decided in favour of a binding nature for such agreements.  It is therefore likely that parties entering into such an agreement will now be held to its terms in the event of a breakdown of their marriage.


The Radmacher Case on Pre-Nuptial Agreements


Having met at a London nightclub in 1997, Miss Radmacher had insisted that the only way she could know that her future husband truly loved her for her and not her $100 million fortune was to put in place a Pre-Nuptial Agreement.  Having cohabited for 8 months, Miss Radmacher instructed experienced family lawyers to draft the agreement setting out the division of assets to which Mr Gratino entered into.  At that time, Mr Gratino had worked as an investment banker in London, earning up to £130,000 per annum.  After four years of marriage, however, Mr Gratino began his studies towards a doctorate at Oxford University and his earnings were significantly reduced as a result.  After eight years of marriage, the couple, by then with two children, decided to separate.  


Initially, the Court had awarded Mr Gratino $5.5 million in ancillary relief proceedings.  This payment was vastly reduced by the Court of Appeal to $1 million soon after.  On 20th October 2010, the Supreme Court, attaching significant weight to a Pre-Nuptial Agreement between the parties, handed down a judgment to the effect that Mr Gratino would receive a mere £70,000 per annum from his ex-wife until their youngest child is aged 22 years.


How can Hanne & Co help you?


Hanne & Co are one of London's leading family law firms and our specialist family law department possess decades of experience in complex ancillary relief proceedings and Pre-Nuptial Agreements.  Following the Supreme Court ruling in Radmacher, it is likely that many wealthy couples will seek legal advice prior to marriage and put in place Pre-Nuptial Agreements with a view to protecting their respective financial positions.  


Far from an unromantic business agreement, a Pre-Nuptial Agreement is a step towards securing simplicity in the unfortunate event that your marriage subsequently breaks down.  At Hanne & Co, we are able to appreciate the stressful nature of your big day.  We do, however, possess decades of invaluable experience in ancillary relief proceedings and as a leading London law firm, offering specialist services in family law, we are in a position to advise you accordingly.  


Hanne & Co have acted for both husbands and wives in complex and international ancillary relief proceedings since 1898.  We are also able to offer specialist advice on Post-Nuptial Agreements and Separation Agreements.


Please feel free to enquire with one of our family law team on +44 (020) 7228 0017, alternatively you can contact us through info@hanne.co.uk or via our website www.hanne.co.uk, and one of our experienced family lawyers will be in touch.