Blog
Kingsley Napley’s Medical Negligence Team ‘walks together’ with the Dame Vera Lynn Children’s Charity
Sharon Burkill
De manière croissante, des couples de nationalités différentes me consultent et me demandent d’établir pour eux des contrats maritaux. Mon devoir de conseil m’oblige cependant à les avertir qu’il se peut qu’ils rencontrent des difficultés quant à l’application de ce contrat, particulièrement à l’étranger.
Les récentes décisions prises dans les affaires de divorce « Sharland » et « Gohil » par la Cour Suprême de Londres en octobre 2015 montrent qu’il existe de larges différences de pouvoirs entre l’Angleterre et la France en matière de divulgation patrimoniale.
The recent divorce cases of Sharland and Gohil, which were decided in the Supreme Court in London in October 2015, demonstrate the significant differences in financial disclosure powers between England and France.
Our clients frequently come to us with the understanding that where they marry is relevant to where they will get divorced. They assume there is a connection to that place and that there is no choice therefore as to where they might get divorced. These assumptions are wrong and an already complex picture is even more confusing for international couples when it comes to pre-nuptial agreements.
Dealing with the relocation of children to another country in situations of family breakdown can be highly complex and challenging – and in most cases, there is no win-win situation for any party involved. The very recent High Court decision in the case of CB v CB [2013] EWHC 2092 shows this. This involved a dispute between an Australian-British dual citizen mother and a British father. Their son, aged 14, had stayed with his father in England after a Christmas visit. This followed a two year period where the mother had relocated to Australia with the child to live on a short-term basis, with the father's permission.
Sharon Burkill
Natalie Cohen
Caroline Sheldon
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility