Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articlesrss feeds
Prenatal Paternity Testing in the Family Courts
SPONSORED CONTENTCasey Randall, Head of Genetics at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the benefits of Non-invasive Prenatal Paternity testing for the timely resolution of family disputes.  Uncertainty...
The law on maintenance should be reformed to provide a formulaic approach
Rebecca Gardner, Winner of 4PB’s 2024 Financial Remedy Essay CompetitionThis article examines the challenges within the law of spousal maintenance in English family law, highlighting the...
Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill: Children’s Commissioner’s Written Evidence
The Children’s Commissioner has submitted written evidence to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill Committee.This evidence builds on oral evidence provided by the Children’s Commissioner on 21...
Importance of due diligence: public policy in overseas surrogacy arrangements
Christie O’Connell, Barrister, 1 Hare CourtEmma Dewhurst, Senior Associate, Hall BrownChristie O’Connell, Barrister at 1 Hare Court and Emma Dewhurst, Senior Associate at Hall Brown,...
Disability as a section 25 factor
Naomh Gallagher, St John’s BuildingsDespite disability being a Section 25 factor in its own right, there is a dearth of resources specifically addressing the same. Often rolled into earning capacity,...
View all articles
Authors

Family Provision: what is the trouble with modern 1975 Act disputes?

Sep 29, 2018, 18:25 PM
Title : Family Provision: what is the trouble with modern 1975 Act disputes?
Slug : family-provision-what-is-the-trouble-with-modern-1975-act-disputes
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Sep 14, 2012, 07:55 AM
Article ID : 100273

Andrew Francis:

This article looks at three recent and important decisions under the Inheritance etc. Act 1975; namely, Ilott v Mitson, Iqbal v Ahmed (both Court of Appeal 2011) and Lilleyman v Lilleyman (Briggs J, Chancery Division, 2012).

It analyses the three decisions from the perspective of what can be learnt from them and in particular what is and is not relevant when advising on the merits of 1975 Act claims, and in appeals in that jurisdiction, and whether for claimant or defendant.

The article analyses the proper way to look at the 1975 Act and the cases on it and the need to avoid advising on a false basis, usually derived from what is not in that Act or the cases.  It also focuses on the most important aspect of costs, costs protection and Part 36 offers.  The unfortunate costs outcome for the Claimant in Llleyman is demonstrated from the figures in that case.

The articles is written by the principal author of "Inheritance Act Claims, Law Practice and Procedure" (Jordans) who as a practising barrister in this field, can shed real light on what does and does not matter in these claims when in Court.

Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from