Blog
Kingsley Napley’s Medical Negligence Team ‘walks together’ with the Dame Vera Lynn Children’s Charity
Sharon Burkill
Episode 5 of the Split centres around Hannah and Nathan’s crumbling marriage following the disclosure of Nathan’s name being listed on an extra marital website. Like anyone who has just discovered their partner has been unfaithful, Hannah is determined to find out the extent of Nathan’s infidelity and she instructs a private detective, one whom she conveniently has instructed for her client Goldie. As the private detective remarks - “in this digital age, affairs are easier but it’s harder to hide them”.
It’s not only tax experts that need be alive to the new transparency requirement for company ownership in overseas territories, divorce lawyers will take a keen interest too.
New disclosure rules pushed through the House of Commons on 1 May 2018 will require British overseas territories, including the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands, to publish company ownership registers by 31 December 2020.
Last night we saw the first of a six part series which focuses on the world of divorce. It is a drama; they use dramatic license to make the show interesting, appealing to the public and to fit into six parts. The show is the first of its kind in this country and it is exciting to see our profession featured in a high profile drama which will provide a platform for family law issues to be discussed. I hope The Split will also give us the opportunity to share our advice, thoughts and experiences from inside the profession.
The Court of Appeal’s latest family judgment of Waggott v Waggott [2018] EWCA Civ 727 (Waggott) provides another indication that the ‘meal ticket for life’ (via the joint lives maintenance order) is no longer something that wives can expect from the English courts.
London is often seen as “Divorce capital of the world“ by wealthy expats, usually the wives, wanting a generous divorce settlement, but this latest UK case shows there are limits. The English Court of Appeal issued an emphatic “No” in April 2018 to an attempt by a wife to argue that her husband’s earning capacity is capable of being a matrimonial asset, to which the sharing principle applies and in the product of which, as a result, she had a continuing entitlement to share.
Sharon Burkill
Natalie Cohen
Caroline Sheldon
Legal Notices | Privacy Notice | Fraud Warning | Modern Slavery Statement | Complaints | Website Terms | Cookie Policy | Accessibility | Site Map
© 2025 Kingsley Napley LLP. All rights reserved. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, registration number 500046.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility