Author Archives: admin
The latest edition of The Legal 500 has been released, an event that always excites the Trinity Chambers team. With several of our barristers having been regularly featured on this leading guide of law firms and solicitors across the UK in the past, the 2018 edition is no exception.
In fact, it’s been particularly special for Trinity Chambers, as we achieved more mentions this year than at any time in our history. Six of our highly skilled barristers were listed in their Family & Children Law section, while another was included in their recommended Personal Injury & Clinical Negligence practitioners.
We are delighted by this wonderful accomplishment for our chambers and our worthy professionals.
Family & Children Law Recommendations
A tenant at Trinity Chambers since our inception in 1997, Andrew Bailey is highly-r…
The case of Howlett v Davies  EWCA Civ 1696 clarified a number of issues relating to fundamental dishonesty. Here, we review the relevant case law and what information professionals should be aware of going forward.
Fundamental Dishonesty – Howlett v Davies 
The Court of Appeal provided clarification on two issues regarding fundamental dishonesty:
Definition for QOCS purposes
Requirement to plead
The Claimants brought claims for injuries and losses arising out of an alleged road traffic accident. At first instance, the Deputy District Judge had no confidence that the accident happened as described by the Claimants or at all, and found fundamental dishonesty despite it not having been pleaded. On a second appeal, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the Deputy District Judge had been entitled to do so.
1. Definition of fundamental…
With Practice Direction 27A – Family Proceedings: Court Bundles recently revised and coming into effect on 23 July 2018, Trinity Chambers’ family law specialists outline the three key changes this Practice Direction has introduced, including on page limits for certain types of documents and its application to electronic bundles.
The revised Practice Direction 27A — Family Proceedings: Court Bundles (Universal Practice to be applied in the High Court and the Family Court) came into effect on 23 July 2018 and introduced three key changes:
1. Page limits for certain types of documents
2. Further requirements for bundles of authorities
3. The inclusion of various provisions confirming that PD27A applies to electronic bundles
In a letter to local practitioners, HHJ Roberts, DFJ for Essex and Suffolk, drew particular attention …
The Reasonable Judicial Parent and Implacably Hostile Communities: The Presumption in Favour of Contact Remains Strong in Child Arrangements Orders
Our latest blog post discusses the intriguing case of Re M (Children)  concluded in late 2017. These proceedings covered the topic of child arrangements orders in circumstances where a father had left his former religious community for his decision to live as a transgender woman, and initially ruled to only have indirect contact with his five children.
Re M (Children)  EWCA Civ 2164
The Court of Appeal has overturned a child arrangements order that there is to be no direct contact between five ultra-orthodox Jewish children, aged 3 to 13, and their father who had left the Charedi community to live openly as a transgender woman.
The mother, supported by the children’s guardian, contended that direct contact would be harmful for the children because they would be alienated by their religious community, who would not accept the fath…
The Supreme Court recently considered whether a symptomless condition could amount to actionable damage. The condition in question was platinum salt sensitisation (PSS), contracted by the claimants in the course of their employment. PSS is asymptomatic but carries a real risk of progression, especially where those affected continue to be exposed to platinum salts. The claimants were consequently prevented from working around platinum salts.
The Court revisited two leading cases: Cartledge v E Jopling & Sons Ltd  AC 758 and Rothwell v Chemical Insulating Co Ltd  AC 281.
The claimants sought to rely upon Cartledge, a case in which steelworkers had inhaled harmful silica particles. As a result, the workers suffered reduced lung capacity and were at an increased risk of complications should they contract a separate illness affectin…
Gabrielle Jan Posner, one of our specialist family law barristers and door tenants, recently had an article published on Family Law Week arguing for a more involved role for Independent Reviewing Officers in Care Proceedings. If you would like to read the complete article, you can find it on their website.
If you would like to receive dedicated legal advice and representation from Gabrielle and our other family law experts during care proceedings and other circumstances, get in touch with our helpful clerks today. Call us on 01245 605040 or email email@example.com.
In the 18th View from the President’s Chambers, the President of the Family Division of the High Court of England and Wales, Sir James Munby, has set out in some detail his plans for the new Financial Remedies Courts (‘FRCs’), including plans to pilot the scheme in the South-East as early as Easter 2018.
On 1st December 2017, the President announced plans to introduce specialist courts to deal with financial remedies, which will include claims under:
- The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
- Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989
- Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984
- The Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
- The Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996
We now know that the first three pilots of these new Financial Remedies Courts, in London, the West Midlands, and South-East Wales, are e…
In the recent case of Ball v Ball 2017 EWHC 1750 Ch, the High Court rejected a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975 (IPFDA) made by three adult children against their mother’s estate.
The IPFDA allows the court to provide further financial provisions for family and dependents who have been left out of a will, been left with less than they thought due, or if no will had been written prior to death. This includes, but is not limited to, the spouse of the deceased, the deceased’s children, and dependants maintained by the deceased.
In this particular case, the mother had disinherited three of her children for reporting their father to the police for indecent assault offences, for which the father was later convicted. The mother, who was not the abuser, had a clear intention for the 20 years following the …
Statutory Demands: Creditor faces costs order even when they were entitled to serve the statutory demand
Dunhill v Hughmans (A Firm)  EWHC 2073 (Ch)
The High Court has recently held that although a creditor was ‘entitled’ to serve its statutory demand when it did, it had not been ‘appropriate’ to do so. Accordingly, the creditor was liable for the debtor’s costs of applying to set aside.
The court held that the creditor was entitled to serve its statutory demand upon obtaining summary judgment. However, it went on to consider that entitlement against the appropriateness of doing so when the creditor knew the debtor was seeking permission to appeal.
Upon the debtor’s appeal being allowed, the creditor proposed withdrawing its statutory demand with no order as to costs. The court held that it was reasonable for the debtor to reject that proposal. The debtor was therefore entitled to her costs.
This is a reminder that creditors mus…