If you are an unmarried parent seeking child maintenance from the non-resident parent, your first recourse is likely to be the Child Maintenance Service (CMS). However, the CMS’s jurisdiction is limited to cases where the non-resident parent earns less than £156,000 gross per annum and is based in the UK. If you are seeking child maintenance from a high earner and/ or someone based outside of the UK, you may be able to apply to the court for additional financial provision for your child’s benefit.

Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 (Schedule 1) provides provisions to protect and provide for financial support for a child in a situation where the parents are unmarried or have not entered into a civil partnership. Unfortunately, due to most of the existing case law featuring high-net-worth couples, the option of a Schedule 1 application can often be overlooked. In fact, the provisions are in no way limited to ‘big money’ cases, it can be used by any parent who falls outside of the CMS jurisdiction and requires financial support for their child.

The court’s powers in a Schedule 1 case can include:

top-up maintenance (you must have a maximum maintenance assessment completed by the CMS first);

payment of school fees;

lump sum(s);

a “carer’s allowance” – this may be used to cover paying for childcare, petrol for taking the children to school and extra-curricular activities etc.; and

the purchase or transfer of a property to the parent who cares for the child, which will be returned to the non-resident parent when the child completes their education or turns 18.

In situations where a child has a disability or exceptional circumstances apply, the Court can make orders for periodical payments and lump sums.

It is important to note that parents can make Schedule 1 arrangements between themselves with the help of a Family Law Solicitor and/or a Mediator.

What will the Court consider when deciding on a Schedule 1 application?

When the Court is asked to consider a Schedule 1 application, it will examine:

The financial resources available to both parents;

Additional responsibilities, for example, other children outside the relationship; Any disabilities of the subject child;

The financial needs of the child;

The standard of living and original choices that were made for the subject child – for example, private school, a large extra-curricular schedule, overseas excursions etc.

Both parents must provide full and frank financial disclosure.

The Court’s overriding consideration is ‘are the needs of the child being met?’ rather than what is necessarily fair or equal.

Can a Schedule 1 application extend to other maintenance provisions that do not concern the child?

In the recent case of CA v DR [2021] EWFC 21, 2021 WL 00878551] the Family Court held that a Schedule 1 claim for child maintenance by an unmarried mother could not extend to funding a personal pension for the mother or funding the build-up of savings from child maintenance payments to provide for the mother’s ongoing needs after the child’s financial support ended. Mrs Justice Roberts quoted Lord Justice Macur in Re A (a child) [2014] EWCA Civ 1577 at paragraph 19:

“The literal or purposive interpretation of Schedule 1 does not permit [..] by the back door, financial provision and compensation for the carer beyond that element attributable to the care of the child during his minority, or other determined duration of dependency. There is no established authority to the contrary. The judgment of Lady Hale in Gow v Grant [2012] UKSC 29, [2012] 3 FCR 73, at paragraphs 44 – 56 which urges reform of the law to re- balance the financial consequences of relationship breakdown in cohabitation, makes this clear, as does the prevailing case law on this point…”

Final words

Schedule 1 provides an alternative route for unmarried parents seeking additional child maintenance payments where the non-resident parent’s income exceeds the CMS jurisdiction, and/ or where they are based outside of the UK. Instructing an experienced Family Law Solicitor will ensure your interests are protected and you achieve your objectives when making the application.

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm specialising in high-net-worth divorce and international family law. To find out more about child maintenance orders and Schedule 1 claims, please phone +44 (0)20 3983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

One of the factors set out under section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 that the Court must consider when deciding on financial settlement matters is the duration of the marriage. In the recent case of E v L [2021] EWFC 60, The Hon. Mr Justice Mostyn considered an application for financial remedies in a short marriage where the parties had no children. The matrimonial property was valued at around £9.2 million.

Background to the decision

The husband and wife were both in their early 60s. They had begun their relationship in 2015, married in 2017, and separated in 2019. The husband was a highly successful production manager for live music events and had an interest in six businesses. The wife looked after the home and received income from her London buy-to-let property. A dispute arose regarding the value of one of the husband’s companies. The wife sought a financial settlement of £5.5 million.

Her husband offered £600,000.

The husband argued that because the marriage was of short duration and there were no children, there was no case for the equal sharing principle.

The Judge’s decision

When setting out his decision, Mr Justice Mostyn made it clear, childlessness was irrelevant to whether there should be a departure from the application of the equal sharing principle.

He put it to the husband’s Counsel:

“The sharing principle looks at the value accrued during the span of the marital relationship and, deeming the parties’ incommensurable contributions to that accrual to be of equal worth, divides that value equally. Why should the presence of a child make a difference?”

The husband responded that the “having of children denotes a completely different category of commitment.”

Mr Justice Mostyn stated that he “fundamentally disagreed” with the above reasoning and then stated:

“In applying the sharing principle it is not merely invidious, but extremely dangerous, for the court to attempt an evaluation of the quality of a marriage or of the arrangements made within it, as to do so will almost inevitably trigger subconscious discriminatory practices. It is for this reason that the doctrine of special contribution has to all intents and purposes been consigned to history.”

This judgment (thankfully) reinforces that it is not the court’s place to delve into the minutiae of a divorcing couple’s private life. Not only would this be contrary to public policy but the sheer time it would take to address such matters would overwhelm a system that is already bursting at the seams. The choice to have children is highly personal and sometimes beyond a person’s control for medical reasons or otherwise. Given the huge fertility struggles that many couples face, it would be entirely unfair to compound that struggle by deeming a marriage somewhat ‘lesser’ in the event of a divorce. That aside, in the present case, children were presumably not something that would have been on the horizon given the parties ages and thus is of little relevance to their supposed commitment to one another.

It may be the case that a ‘childless’ marriage leads to the application of the sharing principle because there are sufficient resources to meet the parties’ individual needs. However, as is often the case, the presence of dependent children will often transform the case into a needs one.

Therefore, the court does make an indirect consideration of whether there are children (albeit only dependent ones) when deciding which of the principles from White v White is to be applied.
Regarding the short duration of the marriage, Mr Justice Mostyn concluded that the short-marriage exception was only likely to apply where both parties were financially active and independently so. There was no logical reason to draw a distinction between accrual of assets over a short period and an accrual over a long period.

“For my part I would say (as I have said before when talking about the rarity of sharing of non-matrimonial property) that a case where there can be a legitimate non-discriminatory unequal sharing of matrimonial property earned in a short marriage will be as rare as a white leopard. “

Mr Justice Mostyn explained that the reason for the rarity was making any exception in relation to money earned during the marriage means placing a higher value on financial contributions than those of other contributions. This would result in discrimination and go against the key decisions of White v White [2001] 1 A,C. 596 and Miller v Miller McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24 which established that the concept of equal sharing was the starting point in financial settlement cases irrespective of one party’s role as the breadwinner and the other party’s role as the homemaker.

What does this case mean for wealthy divorcing couples?

This case provides clarification for two issues relating to the marriage of short duration consideration under

section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973:

a) The fact that the marriage was childless has no bearing whatsoever on the parties’ commitment to the marriage and should not be included in the Court’s considerations, and

b) The Court should not distinguish between wealth accrued over a short time and that over a long period.

It is important to note that the Court may still choose to depart from the equal sharing principle when considering property and assets accrued before the nuptials in the case of a short marriage.

The wife in E v L eventually received £1.5 million which equalled half of the equity value of the husband’s business during the period between January 2016 to the date of trial). This was significantly less than the £5.5 originally sought but clearly an improvement on the husbands offer. The husband still walked away with 79% of the £9.2 million disclosed at trial.

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm specialising in high-net-worth divorce and international family law. To find out more about financial orders on divorce, please phone +44 (0)20 3983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

In the landmark case of Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42, the Supreme Court stated that:
“The Court should give effect to a nuptial agreement that is freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation

of its implications unless in the circumstances prevailing it would not be fair to hold the parties to the agreement.”

In the recent case of WC v HC (Financial Remedies Agreements) (Rev1) [2022] EWFC 22, the Honourable Mr Justice Peel, sitting in the Family Court was asked to decide whether an unsigned post-nuptial agreement fell under Radmacher, in that it would be upheld unless doing so would result in unfairness, or disregarded altogether.

The conclusion was somewhere in the middle of the aforementioned extremes.

The wife felt under pressure during negotiations

The couple concerned were living in Switzerland when the husband (H) said he wanted a post-nuptial agreement as the wife (W) wanted the family to return to England for the children’s schooling. H told W he would not allow

her to move with the children without a post nuptial agreement being drafted and signed.

During the 2017 negotiations, W messaged a friend saying she felt “blackmailed…powerless…cornered … abused”.

On 22 August, W’s solicitors approved the post-nuptial agreement and the next day, H’s solicitors did likewise. The parties were due to sign the documents six days later, however, on the day, a doctor certified W was showing “true mental distress”, unconducive to “calm decision making”. W emailed H explaining she was worried about signing previously unseen Swiss documents. She said she would sign the English agreement but never did.

W subsequently moved to England with the children. The relationship broke down and divorce proceedings began.

Was the unsigned post-nuptial agreement enforceable?

Mr Justice Peel concluded that although W had been under pressure to sign the post-nuptial agreement there was no undue pressure.

“I am satisfied that although W and H were under pressure, W was not under undue pressure to enter into it. In almost every Pre or Post Marital Agreement one or other, or both, parties are under a degree of pressure, and emotions may run high. The collision of the excitement engendered by prospective marriage, and the hard realities of negotiating for the breakdown of such a marriage, can be acutely difficult for parties. Tension and disagreement may ensue. If, as here, one side of the family is applying pressure, the difficulties are accentuated. But in the end, each party has to make a choice and unless undue pressure can be demonstrated, the court will ordinarily uphold the agreement. In my judgment, W cannot so demonstrate here.”

Furthermore, W had received independent legal advice, therefore, the agreement could not be simply ignored. Indeed to do so would be contravening section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 as the court would not be considering the full circumstances of the case.

“Although not a strict Radmacher agreement, this was an agreement reached by the parties, with the benefit of legal advice, and upon full disclosure. Even though W did not sign it, in my judgment I am entitled to take it into account and attach such weight to it as I think fit. It is one of the factors, to be considered in the mix. The terms agreed … are relevant, albeit not determinative.”

Mr Justice Peel subsequently awarded W £7.45 million, which was about 60% of the total assets of £12.47 million which “approximates to that which was contained within the Post-Marital Agreement but goes beyond it so as to meet what I consider to be W’s needs judged against all the relevant factors.”

Concluding comments

This case illustrates two points:

a) The court sets the bar for undue influence relatively high. In cases involving significant wealth, especially family wealth on one side, a certain amount of pressure is to be expected. In fact, all negotiations involve pressure which is why it is vital to have independent legal advice from an experienced family law solicitor who can provide the pragmatic guidance required to protect their client’s best interests.

b) If the nuptial agreement satisfies the three-part test in Radmacher, namely that it was:

1. freely entered into,
2. both parties understood the agreement, and
3. it is reasonable to hold both parties to the agreement

then it will be considered as forming part of the circumstances of the case, even if one party failed to sign the document.

This case does turn on certain specific facts, for example, Mr Justice Peel noted that W did not attempt to renegotiate the agreement and her solicitor had signed the document. The case may have been decided differently if these factors had not been present. However, for the agreement to fall completely outside Radmacher, W would have had to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that it was either not freely entered into, she did not understand the terms, or it was completely unfair to uphold the agreement.

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm that deal with complex, high value and international family law. To find out more about financial dispute resolution, please phone +44 (0)20 3983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

Most of the high-net-worth (HNW) clients advised and represented by us are relieved when the Court finally grants a divorce-related Financial Order and they can finally put the legal aspects of their divorce behind them. However, although a clean break is highly desirable, the Court can vary Financial Orders sometime in the future if certain circumstances arise.

The Coronavirus pandemic has resulted in requests for the Court to vary Financial Orders relating to nominal periodic payments. For example, in the recent case of AJC v PJP [2021] EWFC B25, the Applicant was an airline pilot who lost her job due to the ramifications of the pandemic. She asked the Court to temporarily convert a previously granted Nominal Periodical Payments Order into a Substantive Maintenance Order until the airline industry started employing people again. However, the Applicant’s former husband argued that he too had suffered financially because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In rejecting the application, the Court held that varying a nominal order upwards is different to varying a substantive periodical payment where the payee receiving maintenance of a prescribed amount understands that it may decrease if their income increases and may increase if the payer earns more and they can demonstrate need. It was held to be unreasonable to convert the Order as the Applicant had been financially self-sufficient at the time it was made, eight years had passed, and the parties’ youngest child was now 14 years old. Furthermore, the change in circumstance resulted from the economic impact of a pandemic affecting billions, not from a disadvantage generated by the relationship between the parties.

AJC v PJP illustrates that the Courts will not vary a Financial Order without good cause. However, in certain circumstances, changes are justified. But before we examine how a Financial Order can be varied, let’s briefly recap what they are.

What is a Financial Order?

There are several types of Financial Orders provided by the Court to ensure the financial settlement you have agreed in negotiation and/or mediation (a Consent Order) or a decision by the Court is wrapped up in a legally binding directive.

Common Financial Orders include: Clean Break Orders

Pension Sharing Orders Property Adjustment Orders Maintenance Orders
Lump Sum Orders

Can I appeal a Financial Order?

If you believe the Judge has made a mistake in applying the law to your case, you can apply for permission to appeal the Financial Order issued by the Court. When considering whether to grant permission to appeal, the Court will consider:

a)  Whether your appeal has a realistic chance of success, and

b)  Is there a convincing reason for the appeal to go ahead?

The Court has several remedies it can grant if your appeal is successful, including:

Affirming the Order.
Setting aside the Financial Oder.
Varying the Order.
Directing the lower Court to consider a specific aspect of the Order again.

What Financial Orders can be varied by the Court?

Under certain circumstances (see below) an application can be made to vary a Financial Order related to the following:

Maintenance pending suit.
Periodical payments and secured periodical payments. Lump sums by instalments.
Provision for children.
Deferred lump sums.

Settlement orders.
Sale of property.
Pension sharing orders (before the decree absolute is granted).

What type of Financial Order cannot be varied?

The Court cannot vary the following type of Financial Orders:

An order for a lump sum or sums under section 23 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, not payable by instalments.

Property adjustment orders (except if they relate to the sale of the property concerned). A pension sharing order after the decree absolute has been granted.

How do I apply to vary or appeal a Financial Order?

The first step to take in applying to vary a Financial Order is to speak to an experienced Family Law Solicitor. They will examine your situation and establish if your existing Order can be varied.

There are several situations in which the Courts will consent to vary a Financial Order, including where one party to the Order:

Exerted undue influence over the other.
Misrepresented their financial situation or committed fraud to achieve the Order they wanted. Misrepresented other facts required to ensure the Order was just and fair.

Financial Orders can also be varied if it is shown that an event has occurred which obliterates the fundamental elements of the original agreement. This is known as a “Barder” event. The Courts have not ruled out the impact of the Coronavirus pandemic as sufficient grounds to qualify as a “Barder” event that could trigger an application to vary a Financial Order however generally these applications are limited in scope and things such as house prices falling or shares in a company being worth more or less is not going to be sufficient to vary an order.

In summary

Applications to vary existing Financial Orders can be made for all sorts of reasons, including ending ongoing spousal maintenance payments to achieve a clean break to a change in financial circumstances due to Covid-19. Our Solicitors specialise in dealing with HNW divorce and financial settlements. We act for both sides, having successfully applied for and defended many cases involving the variation of Financial Orders.

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm specialising in high-net-worth divorce and international family law. To find out more about divorce and financial settlements, please phone +44 (0)20 3983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

Akhmedova v Akhmedov & Ors. [2021] EWHC 545

When a judgement opens with the following line from Leo Tolstoy’s novel ‘Anna Karenina’: “All happy families are alike, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way”, it is fair to assume that the particular dispute is particularly bitter. In Akhmedova v Akhmedov & Ors, Mrs Justice Knowles remarked that while the family before her had access to wealth of which most can only dream, it was one of the unhappiest families to have ever appeared in her courtroom. The judgment tells of a wife fighting to enforce a Financial Order made by a London Court and a Russian oligarch who “would rather have seen the money burnt than for the Wife to receive a penny of it.” Whilst the English family law system provided a kinder outcome for Ms Akhmedova than Tolstoy did for his heroine it was not easy or straightforward with her embarking on a five-year fight that spanned multiple jurisdictions.

The highest settlement awarded by an English Court

In 2013, Ms Akhmedova petitioned an English Court for a financial settlement. Her husband, a Russian oligarch provided a schedule of assets to the Court which totalled £1,092,334,626. In December 2016, Mr Akhmedov was ordered to pay over £450 million to his wife, an amount which represented over 41.5% of his assets. The Order also set aside transactions that had shifted assets into trusts as these allocations were found by the court to have been designed to deprive Ms Akhmedova of the resources. Shortly after, a worldwide freezing order against Mr Akhmedov was applied and he was told to pay a lump sum of £350 million and certain property to his ex-wife.

Mr Akhmedov failed to comply with the Order, thus setting the stage for a multi-jurisdictional battle aimed at piercing various corporate veils to see behind offshore intermediaries that he and his associates used to ensure his wife was never paid her settlement.

Particular focus fell on a superyacht named ‘Luna’. Officially owned by a Liechtenstein company, an English Court later determined that it was beneficially owned by Mr Akhmedov. In February 2018, Ms Akhmedova obtained a freezing injunction in the Dubai International Financial Centre against Mr Akhmedov and a related company named Straight, to stop them from disposing of or dealing with Luna.

Granting relief

Ms Akhmedova sought relief under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and/or under section 37 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Specifically, she asked the Court to set aside the transfers her husband had made

to the other Respondents and a Court Order stating that assets must be returned to her or alternatively, the other Respondents must pay her compensation to reflect the value of the assets transferred to them. After examining both forms of relief, the Court found that Mr Akhmedov, along with his son, had deliberately arranged matters to ensure Ms Akhmedova could never access any of the funds she was awarded. This was done by moving assets into trusts and corporate entities beyond the reach of the Financial Order laid down by the English Court in 2016.

Mrs Justice Knowles also admonished the parties’ son for repeatedly lying to the Court and called him his “father’s lieutenant”. She went on to say:

“I find that he is a dishonest individual who will do anything to assist his father, no doubt because he is utterly dependent on his father for financial support.”

Ms Akhmedova was granted relief with various Respondents being ordered to pay sums to the value of the assets they had received.

Whilst it might seem that this should be the end of the story, not long after this judgement it was reported that Ms Akhmedova accepted a settlement from the husband of £150m. Many would question why but after 5 years chasing the settlement around different jurisdictions the adage “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush” comes to mind. Whilst £150m is still a huge sum of money, Ms Akhemdova also had to pay Burford Capital, her financial backers funding the litigation a hefty success fee.

Comment

This case illustrates the practical and flexible approach of the English Court system and its ability to freeze assets worldwide to ensure the enforcement of a Financial Order. The decision also shows that the English Family Courts will not hesitate in piercing corporate veils when it is clear that one party to a divorce has deliberately moved assets into offshore trusts and companies to deprive their ex-spouse of a fair financial settlement. However, it also demonstrates that despite the plethora of powers available, enforcement is still laced with difficulty when particularly obstructive individuals and jurisdictions are involved.

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm specialising in high-net-worth divorce and international family law. To find out more about divorce and financial settlements, please phone +44 (0)20 3 983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

It is often assumed that mediation is too ‘soft’ an approach for working out a financial settlement in high-net- worth (HNW) divorce and is primarily a mechanism for establishing arrangements for children. However, such an assumption can deny couples the opportunity to take control of the financial settlement process and reach an agreement in a calm, non-confrontational manner.

There are several advantages of mediation in HNW divorce, including:

Confidentiality – the British tabloids are famous for their love of scandal and will viciously latch on to HNW divorce cases that end up in Court. Mediation is a completely confidential process, allowing you to

work through your divorce without the stress of publicity (which can become cruel) and details of your marriage becoming media fodder that could one day be read by your children.

Win-win solutions – unlike formal litigation, mediation is not a win-lose process. The Mediator, who will be experienced in family law matters, will work with you and your spouse to help you reach a fair agreement and allows you both to move on to positive futures.

Mediation is voluntary – no one can force you to attend mediation, unlike Court where one party can issue proceedings. This alone provides a platform where communication is based on mutual co-operation and respect, providing a robust foundation for a positive outcome.

Choosing mediation does not mean you will lack legal support. Your Divorce Solicitor will advise and represent you throughout the mediation process, ensuring your interests are protected.

However, because the mediation process is designed to be used by people who may not have legal representation, it is free from the legalese and procedures found in Court, allowing you greater control over how things are run.

The cost of going to Court

Even people with significant assets and plenty of money to fund ongoing divorce litigation may baulk at the true cost of going to Court. Legal bills of hundreds of thousands of pounds are easy to achieve. But the cost of litigation is not just financial. Going to Court is stressful and can be time consuming. Furthermore, as it is by nature adversarial, it does little in the way of helping parties learn to put aside their differences and communicate compassionately, something that will be essential going forward if children are involved.

Mediation on the other hand is a great deal cheaper than going to Court. It is also quicker and deliberately designed to make parties feel safe and confident in expressing their needs and opinions. And if matters cannot be resolved by mediation, the option to file Court proceedings remains available.

The process of mediation

A MIAM is the first stage in the mediation process whereby a trained mediator explains the process and the benefits to each party. Not all cases are suitable for mediation, including those in which one party is bankrupt, there is evidence of domestic violence, there are child protection concerns, both have already attended a MIAM in the last four months, or there is a significant risk of harm or hardship. It is also important to understand that mediation is not mandatory, but the attendance of the MIAM is (except in the situations listed above) if you wish to apply for a Family Court Order.

You can choose to attend a MIAM on your own, or with the other party. During the first session, the Mediator will gather information to determine if mediation is a suitable way to resolve your dispute.

If, after the MIAM, you decide mediation is not the right process for you, or the Mediator deems it to be inappropriate, then you will be given a form that proves to the Court you have considered mediation.

If both parties agree to mediation, what happens next?

If both parties and the mediator agree mediation is appropriate, then you will be informed of the next steps. Mediation is a purely voluntary process in which two people can seek to resolve a dispute with the assistance of a trained mediator. It is highly effective in situations in which both parties are open to resolving the dispute at hand, and for any financial matters, there must full financial disclosure.

Mediation is also useful where there has been a previous arrangement, which needs to be updated (perhaps as children get older).

The discussion can be undertaken face to face, but it is possible to use separate rooms; this is sometimes referred to as ‘shuttled mediation’.

During the session, your Mediator will:

Listen to both parties to determine what needs to be worked through
Ensure that both people are heard equally – this is important to ensure a fair process and outcome Offer any guidance or information relevant to the discussion
Advise you if it will be necessary to seek input from other services or specialists

Work towards an agreement which is fair to both parties, always considering the needs of any children involved

It might be necessary during the process to consult with a Solicitor to validate the legality of what is being agreed or discussed – your Mediator will advise how this can be done.

It is important to understand any agreement during mediation is not legally binding, but it can be made legal by drawing up a consent order (drafted by your Solicitor), which must be approved by a Judge. This is essential. To find out more read our blog post on consent orders here.

Final words

Mediation is truly effective as a method of resolving HNW divorce disputes. Many people who initially believe it will not be effective for their situation change their perspective during the MIAM process, realising that it is highly preferable to the cost and stress of going through the Court process. For the long-term benefit of all involved, especially for children, it is important to consider the merits of a non-confrontational method of resolving family disputes. Of course, there will always be contexts in which the Courts must be involved, and it might be that mediation achieves only a partial agreement, leaving a final point to be decided by a Judge – but as they say, you will not know until you try.

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm specialising in high-net-worth divorce and international family law. To find out more about divorce and financial settlements and the benefits of mediation (and whether it is appropriate in your case) please phone +44 (0)20 3983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

There is a saying that all psychopaths are narcissists but not all narcissists are psychopaths. For anyone who has been in a relationship with a narcissist and is attempting to divorce them, this fact may seem a small mercy. Unfortunately, many successful people have significant narcissistic traits, therefore, we often deal with spouses in high-net-worth and international divorce who are trying to escape a narcissist.

The term narcissist is used a great deal these days. However, someone with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is very different from a person who enjoys posting selfies. Often charming and personable in public (including the courtroom), someone with NPD can be controlling, superficial, manipulative, and downright dangerous. Although the English family law system is geared towards encouraging couples to work out financial settlements and arrangements for children between themselves or through mediation rather than going to Court, a narcissist will thrive on dragging out proceedings as long as possible. Furthermore, someone with NPD is unlikely to ever admit they did anything wrong and will blame you for the relationship breaking down. This can often lead someone to question their sanity and start to believe they are wrong – this is known as “gaslighting”.

To stay strong and sane, you need to instruct an experienced, tough Divorce Solicitor who will refuse to engage with your spouse’s gameplaying and will tenaciously fight to ensure you and your children’s best interests are protected, especially concerning the financial settlement.

What is Narcissistic Personality Disorder?

NPD is a recognised mental illness. According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), a guidebook used by mental health professionals, people with NPD have five or more of the below traits:

A grandiose sense of self-importance
Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

A belief that one is special and can only be understood by or associate with special people or institutions A need for excessive admiration
A sense of entitlement (to special treatment)
Exploitation of others

A lack of empathy

Envy of others or the belief that one is the object of envy Arrogant, haughty behaviour, or attitudes

Like all mental health issues, narcissism is a spectrum. People such as Bill Gates, Kayne West, Donald Trump, and Mariah Carey have all been accused of displaying narcissistic traits which may make them difficult to be married to. However, this does not necessarily mean they have full-blown NPD.

Regardless, the more narcissistic characteristics a person has, the more difficult it will be to divorce them.

Negotiating financial settlements with a narcissist

It is extremely difficult to negotiate the terms of a financial settlement with someone with NPD. Because they lack empathy, they can’t consider the needs of you and any children as they are fixated on their desires. Although Family Law Solicitors, especially those who are members of Resolution, try to help couples settle without going to Court, such an aim is often impossible if one spouse is a narcissist.

Because someone with NPD or significant narcissistic traits will never admit they are in the wrong, you may think it is simply easier to let them have what they want in terms of the financial settlement so you and your children can get out of the situation and find some peace. Rather than jeopardise your right to a fair financial settlement, in so far as possible, have all communications regarding your divorce go through your Solicitor. A Divorce Lawyer experienced in HNW divorce will undoubtedly have come across narcissists many times and will have the emotional detachment and the strategies to sort out the financial settlement efficiently and effectively, regardless of any game-playing by your spouse.

Arrangements for children

Studies show that growing up with a narcissistic parent is incredibly damaging for a child. One group of scholars have stated:

“Narcissistic parents cause attachment injuries to their children through the frequent abdication of their parental role. Such parents view their children as a natural extension of themselves. Thus, the child’s shortcomings are met with greater intensity, as they are perceived by the parent as their own failure. In an attempt of self-protection and to recover their sense of self-worth, parents distance themselves from the children, leaving them confused and emotionally abandoned. At the same time, parents may psychologically merge with their children, whereby, the children are narcissistic extensions of their parents; their children’s achievements and successes are presented as their own.”

Although a narcissist is focused on themselves, they may not hesitate to fight for your children to primarily reside with them in order to exert control or hurt you. Any attempt by you to protect your children from the narcissistic parent is likely to result in accusations of parental alienation.

An experienced Family Solicitor will be well versed in such tactics and will, if required, organise for expert witness reports setting out the impact of the narcissistic parent’s behaviour on your children, especially if it tips over into abuse in terms of coercive and controlling behaviour.

In summary

Divorcing a narcissist is difficult for everyone involved. More than ever, it is vital that you instruct a Solicitor who is not only experienced in HNW divorce but also in managing cases where one spouse exhibits narcissistic traits.

“You will never get the truth out of a Narcissist. The closest you will ever come is a story that either makes them the victim or the hero, but never the villain.”

― Shannon L. Alder

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm specialising in high-net-worth divorce and international family law. To find out more about divorce and financial settlements, please phone +44 (0)20 3983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

The average age for getting divorced in England and Wales is 46.9 years for men and 44.5 years for women, and on average, those that do divorce do so after 12.5 years of marriage. These statistics make sense – it is now well-recognised that happiness dips in our mid-40s , only to rise again in our fifth decade. The mid-40s is also when many people are juggling children, elderly parents, and work, leaving little time for nurturing a marriage. But if a couple moves past these difficult years and remains together, we assume they have made it and can look forward to a happy retirement in wedded bliss.

Unfortunately, couples can and do divorce later in life. The recent shock announcement that Bill and Melinda Gates have decided to divorce after 27 years of marriage is a recent example. And when people divorce later in life, the financial settlement aspect of the process can prove highly complex, as there has been time to build wealth and there are the inheritances of adult children to consider. Divorce after 60 often involves dividing a greater amount of assets — such as the family home, overseas property, family businesses, pensions, maintenance, and tax planning.

For those divorcing after 60, below are some of the main things to consider.

Pensions

If you are approaching retirement, dividing your pension will be your top consideration. In July 2019, the Pension Advisory Group (PAG) released a report entitled, A guide to the treatment of pensions on divorce . The paper was endorsed by Sir Andrew McFarlane, President of the Family Division and the contained guidance is considered best practice when it comes to dividing pensions.

There are three main ways pensions are allocated in the event of a divorce:

· Offsetting – the value of pension assets is offset against other assets such as property. A common solution is one partner takes a lesser share of any pensions in favour of staying in the family home.

· Pension Sharing Orders – the clean break solution. Pension assets are divided (not necessarily equally) at the time of divorce.

· Pension Attachment Orders (formally known as earmarking) – the Court will make a Pension Attachment Order providing for a portion of one party’s pension to be set aside for their ex-spouse. The ex-spouse will receive their percentage when the pension starts being paid out. This option comes with risks as the receiving spouse will get nothing if the pension owner dies before the date the pension assets start to be paid.

There are other options such as deferred pension sharing or lump sum payments that may also be considered. Your Family Law Solicitor will go through all the possibilities and advise which one is best for your circumstances.

Tax

Dividing a lifetime worth of assets that have had ample time to mature will likely result in tax implications such as Capital Gains Tax on buy to let properties and/or investments. Another consideration is the impact of dividing property and assets on any Inheritance Tax planning you have in place.

Beware of financial hardship

Divorcing later in life can dramatically affect your wealth at a time when financial security is needed most. When negotiating your financial settlement, you need to think about your future health needs, the lifestyle you plan to enjoy in retirement, and the possibility of meeting a new partner.

Women need to take particular care when choosing a Family Lawyer as research by the Pensions Policy Institute found the average divorced woman has less than a third of the pension wealth of the average divorced man. This is because a greater percentage of women take breaks in their careers to look after children and elderly parents. Even when they return to employment, women are more likely than men to work part-time.

In summary

The financial implications of divorcing later in life are usually greater than that of someone in their 30s or even 40s as younger people still have time to re-build wealth. The key to ensuring you retain, at least to some extent, your pre-divorce standard of living, is to speak with an experienced divorce lawyer who understands how to negotiate financial settlements consisting of considerable assets and property.

Edwards Family Law is a niche London-based firm specialising in high-net-worth divorce and international family law. To find out more about divorce and financial settlements, please phone +44 (0)20 3983 1818 or email contact@edwardsfamilylaw.co.uk. All enquiries are treated in the strictest confidence.

This year has brought more change to our lives than any of us could have ever anticipated. Previously stable industries like travel and hospitality have almost collapsed whilst other businesses have seen record levels of profit amidst increased demand for their services. If you have ongoing financial obligations to your ex and have suffered financially as a result of the pandemic then you may wonder if there is anything that you can do to alleviate the pressure in these times. If you want to discuss this with one of our lawyers, please get in touch today.

If you previously reached a clean break with your former spouse then in all likelihood there is very little that you can do to change the agreement that was reached. However, if an element of that agreement involves spousal maintenance, it is open to you to make an application to the court for this to be varied downwards to reflect the change in your financial circumstances.

This is not a step to be taken lightly and there is no guarantee that you will be successful just because your income has dropped. The court will consider all the circumstances of the case, including both parties’ financial circumstances and needs. Therefore, if your ex has also been impacted financially by the pandemic, this will be taken into account. The court’s first consideration will be for the welfare of any child who is under 18.

It is of course always best to avoid litigation if at all possible and therefore parties should try to come to an agreement directly. However, it should always be borne in mind that if an agreement cannot be reached then court proceedings may be necessary. There are a number of things that you can and should do to protect your position from the outset;

Communicate and keep a record (but keep it cordial)

Whilst direct communication can be fraught, and even impossible in some circumstances, it is important to try and start a dialogue directly if you can. This can help avoid the need to make a court application and incur the costs associated with this. However, if you are met with a wall of silence, the existence of this correspondence (and the lack of any response) evidences a willingness on your part to try to resolve matters at the earliest juncture. This may be of assistance if you are forced to issue proceedings. Judges are slowly becoming more willing to recognise parties acting in an unreasonable manner and making costs awards that reflect this.

However, if you want to show that you have been cooperative, ensure that your correspondence is polite. If you produce correspondence to the judge that is littered with petty comments and profanities, any good favour that you may have gained will likely disappear. A good rule to live by is to imagine that a judge is reading your email

Covid-19 and what to do when considering Variation of Maintenance payments 5.10.2023, 19.13

back to you in the cold light of the court room, if the thought makes you cringe, it’s probably best not to hit send.

It may be that you are able to come to a compromise and if so, you should ensure that there is a written record of this, whether that be in a letter signed by both parties or a side agreement. Get in touch today if you would like us to assist you with this.

Provide evidence

If you are the paying party and have been made redundant or suffered a pay cut then it makes sense to provide your ex-partner with the documentation in support as soon as possible. If they can see the drop in your income in black and white, the change of circumstances should be obvious. This will help to speed up the process if they chose to obtain legal advice because these are the first documents that their lawyer will request.

If things progress to court, you will be required to provide your recent payslips and P60 so there is no harm in producing this at the earliest opportunity to set out your position to contrast against your financial circumstances within the original proceedings.

Be flexible

The regulations and therefore, the associated government support, are changing frequently. Businesses will be responding to changes as and when they are implemented and so if your hours are increased or your pay is reinstated, you should be prepared for maintenance to increase in line with that.

Equally, if you are the payee, whilst you are under no obligation to agree to a reduction in your maintenance, it is much better to take a constructive approach, particularly if the difference in maintenance is likely to cost you less than the associated legal proceedings.

Get legal advice

If you are not able to progress matters by communicating directly, then it is sensible to get some initial advice on the prospects of success of a variation application. It may be that sending a letter from a solicitor forces the other party to take matters more seriously. However, instructing lawyers does not have to mean fully contested court proceedings but sometimes is the necessary catalyst to encourage sensible and constructive discussion. Get in touch today to speak to us.

Do not stop payments

Finally, it is important to note that your initial court order remains in effect until either an agreement to vary is reached, or the court makes a determination. Therefore, if you do not make payments in line with the order you will be in breach and your ex could choose to commence enforcement proceedings. You must comply with the order but if this is impossible because your income has reduced so considerably, then you should raise this issue

Covid-19 and what to do when considering Variation of Maintenance payments 5.10.2023, 19.13

with your ex at the earliest opportunity so that they do not get a surprise when they check their bank account… The court can order that you pay these arrears so it is not as simple as saying that you cannot afford payments and that is the end of the matter, you will need to be able to demonstrate this.

Whether you would like some initial advice, assistance with a court application or formalising an agreement to vary an existing order we can help – get in touch to set up an initial, no obligation, consultation today.

Getting divorced is often quoted as one of the most stressful experiences someone can go through. It is never an easy decision. It is one of the most important financial transactions you will do. It is therefore vital to ensure the team you instruct is the right one for you. Your solicitor should make your divorce easier to deal with rather than a stressful process. We often get asked how easy it is to change solicitors once the process has already begun. the short answer is, it should be easy.

If you want to discuss changing lawyers today, pleas get in touch.

How to choose a family lawyer?

Divorce and Family Law is becoming more and more complex and it is a highly specialised field. Judges have a wide discretion when deciding what a financial settlement should be and therefore there is not a one size fits all. It is important if you have a complicated divorce that you instruct a solicitor that has experience in dealing with the issues in hand and is up to date with the law on the topic. An example of a complicated case might be those with complex asset structures, company interests to consider, arguments about whether assets are “matrimonial” or not, where there might be international considerations and where there might be pre or post nuptial agreements.

Word of mouth recommendations for family lawyers are sometimes the best way to choose a solicitor. Indeed, at Edwards Family Law a large part of our work comes from referrals and previous clients. If you think your case might be more complicated than a friend’s, those lawyers may not have the experience to deal with your case.

If you are unsure about your current legal team and want to see if we can help, get in touch today.

Why change family solicitors?

Divorce is a very personal thing. It is vital that you have a good relationship with your solicitor, and you feel that you trust them both personally and in the advice they give.

One of the most common issues is when someone feels their lawyer lacks confidence in their advice and cannot think on their feet. If your lawyer always says they need to “get back to you” when you ask them a question, then something is probably wrong. If they do not have confidence in their own ability, it is difficult to see how they can expect you to have confidence in them. You should always be able to voice your concerns without fear of being made to feel stupid or shouted at and with an answer being given quickly.

Unfortunately, the relationship between solicitor and client can often deteriorate to the point of no return. The most common reasons we are approached for include;

· a concern about overcharging or high fees;

· lack of confidence in the advice being given;

· concerns about or lack of strategy in the case and feeling like you have no idea what is going on;

· A failure to return calls or emails and frequent unavailability to deal with your case;

· concerns about lack of progress on the case and missing court deadlines;

· a lack of trust;

· not being listened to or heard in any way or that the important facts that they are giving to their solicitors have been overlooked.

· the solicitor does not know or remember the finer details about the case;

Ultimately if you lose trust or confidence in your solicitor for whatever reason, you should at the very least seek a second opinion. If you want to get a second opinion, please get in touch.

In what circumstances can I change solicitor?

If you have concerns about your solicitor and the advice you are receiving, you should seek a second opinion from a specialist family lawyer. To give that opinion, most lawyers will need some basic background information about your case with a snapshot of the assets. A good lawyer will ask the right questions in that initial phone call but any documents you have should be provided before your initial consultation if you are going to get the most from it.

It may well be that the second opinion is the same as the advice you have already received, and this gives you a new sense of optimism and reassurance that your case is on the right track. If not, or you still feel that the confidence and trust has gone, you can switch to new lawyers completely and immediately.

When should I change?

You are legally allowed to change solicitors at any time. You will have to pay any final bill and our experience tells us to ask for an up to date bill of costs before you confirm you are moving lawyers. Only once your final bill is paid will you be able to have your papers released and so it is important you consider any important dates before deciding to go ahead. If you are thinking of changing solicitors and there are court deadlines looming, we would recommend speaking to other lawyers as soon as possible and if necessary asking your existing lawyers to stop work (especially if you are concerned about the advice you are being given or generally quality of work).

In addition, the timing of when you change might be crucial. If there are hearings coming up you may want to ensure you have changed teams so that the strategy going into that hearing is correct and you have confidence moving forward that nothing has been missed. Even if it is a week before the next hearing, if the new lawyer has the time and wherewithal to read in on your case, they will make it happen. On the other hand, it might be more appropriate for you to stay with your existing legal team until that hearing has taken place.

How long does it take?

Appointing a new solicitor for your divorce or family proceedings is simple and straightforward. Once you have paid your final bill, your old solicitors should release your files to your new solicitors’, and you will need to confirm to your old solicitors that you authorise this. Your old solicitors should get the file ready quickly, but if they are slow or seek to delay matters, your new solicitors can and should be able to move it along.

Your new solicitors will then tell the other side and the court that they are acting for you. It will then be a question of your new solicitors reading into your case and getting to grips with all the detail. The time this will take will depend on how long your case has been going on and how complex the disclosure might be together with what other work your new solicitors have. Your new solicitors should be able to give you a clear indication on this. If they cannot, they are probably not going to be an improvement.

If you want to find out how long it might take for us to take on your case, get in touch today.

Is it going to cost me a lot in fees to change lawyers?

You should always try to get an indication on how long the reading in process will take (both in terms of time and costs). The time this takes will also depend on how the file has been put together. We often find that if a file has been put together badly or is disorganised, it is a good reflection on how the case has been managed. Your new solicitor should then be able to discuss the strategy for your case. If you have a good idea of the amount of papers in your case then this will help us give a clear idea on timing and costs.

Is it too late to change solicitors?

If you have already had a final hearing and final orders have been made it will be too late to re argue your case. In limited circumstances you can appeal, and you should consult another solicitor to determine your chances of success. In addition, depending on the advice you received from your existing solicitor you may have a claim for professional negligence. In any other situation, even leading up to a final hearing, you can change lawyers if you need to.

If you think any of the above issues are relevant to your case, have lost confidence in your existing solicitor or just want a second opinion, please get in touch with us today for a confidential, no obligation consultation.