Resolution Podcast S3 Episode #9 | Maintenance and the Length of the Judge’s Foot

https://is1-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Podcasts221/v4/0a/78/b4/0a78b498-95f4-ff0c-c29e-56718a12e68a/mza_9313627939577156557.jpg/600x600bb.jpg

Talking Family Law - The Resolution Podcast

Resolution

45 episodes

3 weeks ago

Guests take on a topical debate in family law in each episode in this podcast series from Resolution. Our hosts, Simon Blain and Anita Mehta, invite family law experts to share their experiences and anecdotes, in an insightful and entertaining conversation.

Management

Business

RSS

All content for Talking Family Law - The Resolution Podcast is the property of Resolution and is served directly from their servers with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.

Management

Business

Resolution Podcast S3 Episode #9 | Maintenance and the Length of the Judge’s Foot | w/ Sally Harrison KC & Farhana Shazhady

Talking Family Law - The Resolution Podcast

52 minutes

1 year ago

Resolution Podcast S3 Episode #9 | Maintenance and the Length of the Judge’s Foot | w/ Sally Harrison KC & Farhana Shazhady

What is the correct approach to a maintenance case? Listen to Sally Harrison KC (St John’s Buildings) and Farhana Shahzady (Streathers Solicitors) tell us how it is done.

Sally reminds us of the guidance of Mr Justice Peel in WC v HC (Financial Remedies Agreements) (Rev1) [2022] EWFC 22 (22 March 2022)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2022/22.html

when thinking about the quantum of a maintenance order. Mr Justice Peel found that needs are an elastic concept, to be judged by reference to consideration of financial needs and obligations, whether there are children, and the age of the parties. We discuss how the length of the marriage really impacts on how much the standard of living is taken into account. Farhana reminds of guidance of Mr Justice Mostyn in SS v NS (Spousal Maintenance) (Rev 1) [2014] EWHC 4183 (Fam).

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2014/4183.html

Sally and Farhana discuss the distinction between cases involving wealthy families where the Court may well be inclined to make a Duxbury award, as opposed to need based income awards in the majority of cases. We discuss the overall impression that Courts are being quite restrictive on terms and quantum of maintenance at present.

When talking about capitalising maintenance awards, Sally wrestles with the discrepancy between the Ogden tables having a -0.25% rate of return in England & Wales, as opposed to Duxbury’s 3.75% rate of return after inflation of 3%.

Sally considers the following cases:

HC v FW [2017] EWHC 3162 (Fam) (29 November 2017)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2017/3162.html

Tattersall

Z (No.5) (Enforcement) [2024] EWFC 44 (04 March 2024)

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2024/44.html

Farhana tells us why it is important to consider the impact of menopause, when considering maintenance quantum, term and nominal maintenance. She shares the details of her survey about the impact of maintenance in family law and financial remedy cases.

Resolution will be releasing a spousal maintenance handbook in Summer 2024. Please check the website for details.