David Salter

This Practice Note considers the impact of the UK exiting the EU (commonly known as Brexit) on the service of court documents in family proceedings within the EU. It considers the position under Regulation (EC) 1393/2007 (the Service Regulation) and the position both during the transition/implementation period (31 January 2020 to 31 December 2020) and after implementation period (IP) completion day (11pm on 31 December 2020).

This Practice Note sets out the requirements to enforce an order made in family proceedings by way of a charging order as provided for by the Charging Orders Act 1979. It includes details of debts that can be enforced, assets that can be charged and enforcement by sale. It also sets out the procedure to be adopted in accordance with Part 40 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010) and FPR 2010, PD 40A.

This Practice Note examines the development of the role of choice of court agreements in the family jurisdiction in England and Wales and the impact of Brexit upon this type of agreement. It looks at choice of court agreements in the broader context of jurisdiction both prior to and following Brexit, where it may be possible to choose a jurisdiction or seek to transfer proceedings.

This Practice Note provides guidance on the rules regarding costs in family proceedings, the application of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010) and the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998), and factors taken into account by the court in determining costs including conduct and offers of settlement. It also considers costs on divorce or dissolution (both prior to and after the coming into effect of the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 (DDSA 2020) on 6 April 2022), the types of costs orders that may be made by the court, costs in relation to litigants in person and costs orders against non-parties.

This Practice Note provides a summary of the rules in relation to costs in proceedings for a financial remedy within divorce or civil partnership proceedings that are subject to the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), or in financial proceedings that are subject to the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998).

This Practice Note looks at the treatment of cryptoassets such as Bitcoin in family law proceedings, as well as how cryptocurrencies work and their legal and tax status. The approach to cryptoassets within family proceedings is also considered, including as to tracing and disclosure, valuation, expert evidence and preservation and enforcement.

This Practice Note deals with the circumstances in which an application may be made under the Presumption of Death Act 2013 that a missing person has died, or has not been known to be alive for a period of at least seven years. Such a declaration is effective against all persons and for all purposes, including for the purposes of the acquisition of an interest in any property, and the ending of a marriage or civil partnership to which the missing person is a party. The provisions of the Guardianship (Missing Persons) Act 2017 are also considered.

This Practice Note sets out the procedure and approach to obtaining a disclosure or inspection order regarding a non-party to family proceedings under the provisions of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), including case law examples. It also details other procedures whereby a disclosure order may be made, and the implications of a claim of public interest immunity.

This Practice Note deals with the determination, and different types, of domicile, including domicile of origin, choice, and dependence, in the context of family proceedings, and provides guidance on how the court will determine domicile and its impact on proceedings. It further details the determination of habitual residence, including that of a child, and relevant case law. The implications of Brexit, including transitional provisions, are also considered.

This Practice Note sets out specific considerations where an order made in family proceedings is enforced against a company or trust, commonly known as ‘piercing the corporate veil’, including in cases involving a foreign jurisdiction. It also considers when it may be appropriate to add a trustee, beneficiary or company director as a party to the proceedings.