Isn’t summer supposed to be a quiet time?  Frank Arndt, who heads Stowe Family Law’s international family law department, seems to be busier than ever – and not just because his team has recently been instructed in some very interesting new cases.

When the second wife of Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky was granted a “quickie divorce” at the High Court last week, Frank was contacted by a number of journalists for expert comment and analysis. His comments, about the Berezovsky case and also about the UK’s much vaunted reputation as the “divorce capital of the world”, have since appeared as far afield as Russia and Australia!

Divorce tourists face judicial rethink

Frank Arndt, head of international practice at Stowe Family Law, said: “There is a perception that wives can achieve a fairer settlement in England and importantly there are obligations here for full and frank disclosure of assets belonging to one party, which there may not be in some countries. Often husbands see divorce as a business deal and look at which jurisdiction is best.” Continue reading»

Boris Berezovsky’s wife granted “quickie divorce”

Frank Arndt, a lawyer at Stowe Family Law, which specialises in big money divorces, said: ”The Berezovskys were married for 18 years, have two teenage children and, although estimates of the couple’s fortune vary, it is indeed likely that any settlement eventually awarded to Mrs Berezovsky will dwarf the £48 million awarded to Beverley Charman in 2008.” Continue reading»

London seals reputation as divorce capital as oligarch faces £100 million payout to ex-wife

[Frank] Arndt said Berezovsky may use what is known in the legal profession as the “stellar or genius” argument used by Charman, in which he said his wife had made no financial contribution to the fortune he had built up in the insurance market during their marriage. His case resulted in a discount from the 50:50 position: a high court judge ruled Charman should have 63.5% of the couple’s wealth rather than half because of his special contribution to building it up and because the assets he was keeping were riskier than those which went to his wife.” Continue reading»

Our offices in Yorkshire and Cheshire are busier than ever and our newest office, off High Holborn, is set to open early next year.  We are looking for senior solicitors to join our teams in all these locations and, since I know that plenty of lawyers read this blog, I thought that it would be a great place to start!

Our locations

I have written before about how blessed I feel to live in such a beautiful part of the world, and how much I enjoy beginning every week with my drive into Harrogate. The town is at the gateway to the Yorkshire Dales and our Harrogate office (above) is the town’s former courthouse. It is a gorgeous old building in the town centre.

Our office in Hale, meanwhile, is the Camellia Building on Oxford Road. Stowe Family Law expanded into Cheshire after we observed that increased numbers of clients were flying into Manchester Airport and then making the trip across the Pennines so that they could see us. Our Cheshire office opened in 2008 and quickly became popular with clients from Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and beyond.

As for London: we are on track to open our Fulwood Place office in early 2011, and we are looking forward to it. Continue reading »

A client recently paid me a very kind but rather unusual compliment.

“Every time I see you”, she said, “you smile at me – and it isn’t just any old smile, but a bright, confident one.”

Apparently my smile brightens her day and does wonders for both her confidence and her hopes for her case.

How nice is that? Apparently I was a smiley baby – and I have been smiling at people ever since. I always used to smile at people when I was a runner. In Yorkshire, my fellow runners always smiled back. Mind you, in London I used to get startled looks in response – and in New York I was stared at like I was a weirdo! So no more smiles there then…

The client’s comments made my day and gave me pause for thought, especially as she went on to add that she recently stopped going to a particular dentist because although the dentist was undoubtedly competent, she never, ever smiled. My client said that she always left the dentist feeling tense and sometimes miserable, not because of the treatment but because of the unsmiling dentist’s terse manner. I know the dentist to whom she was referring and I agree that she gives the impression of being overly serious. However I am equally certain that the dentist would be shocked and horrified if she knew that people thought of her in such a way.

I was thinking about this yesterday as I was having a mug of coffee, relaxing after cycling a record (for me) 30 km on the Wattbike and throwing 16 kg kettlebells some 120 times!  I was reading about the presenter Selina Scott’s latest complaint against the BBC, whom she accuses of “blatant and sometimes malign ageism and sexism. I don’t agree. Continue reading »

As a family lawyer, I like to think there is no dispute for which a solution cannot be found. No matter how polarised the clients are, and no matter how contrasting their arguments may be, at some point their disputes can and will be resolved.

This week at Stowe Family Law, for example, our children lawyers have been especially busy. We have been instructed in a number of contact and residence disputes.  Trying to conciliate the parents’ disputes, bringing them together peaceably for the sake of their children, can be challenging work – and these are challenges that our children lawyers face day in, day out. As you can imagine, they often encounter hostility and intransigence – but they never give up.  Our children’s department seems to have endless patience and sufficient stamina to keep plugging away. They seek to obtain resolutions to disputes, which may include where the children will live, sometimes the country in which the children will live, the time that each parent will spend with the children and so on. In children cases, the children’s welfare – not the parents’ – is paramount.

Every month, I review every client’s file. I am checking the legal content, but files can also begin to resemble serialised novels, with new instalments monthly. I am often anxious to know whether one case or another has been resolved – and if so, on what terms. Some cases settle and I am able to read the terms of the deal. Others continue, destined perhaps for court, but more likely edging towards settlements. Those cases reaching a full-blown hearing are likely to involve very difficult issues, such as mental illness or allegations of abuse. A judge may have to decide where a child should live and whether a child should see a parent at all.  Fortunately such cases are rare. The majority of cases feature polarised parents who begin at different ends of the spectrum and end up somewhere in the middle.

This week, however, the most unpleasant case of polarisation that I encountered had nothing to do with a child dispute. In fact, it involved a group of people with whom I have had few dealings before now. They are travellers, living on a site in Essex. By chance, I met some of them this week. Continue reading »

Over the past couple of weeks, the legal press has been buzzing with news of the demise of Halliwells, a large firm of solicitors based in Manchester. I was saddened to read about the firm’s fate. However I have been horrified by some of the accompanying press commentary, which includes one piece headlined Halliwells: Dangerous Ambition. Why pick over others’ setbacks and dashed hopes with such glee, as if they were fresh bones? Who does that serve?

In Halliwells’ case, it would seem that the firm’s relocation to the expensive Spinningfields development in Manchester, which attracted a substantial reverse premium, is somehow supposed to remove any sympathy for the firm’s fate. I disagree: this recession is unlike any other since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and many UK firms and businesses have been “caught out” by its size and scale. Halliwells isn’t alone. Others – from corporations and small business to individuals – have suffered too.

It is the human side of the story that saddens me most of all. It is all too easy to overlook the fact that juggernaut firms, including those with juggernaut debts, are made up of people who have lives to lead outside of their busy working weeks. They have families, and they have responsibilities. The trappings of a middle-class lifestyle can include mortgages, debts, credit cards and school fees. These expenses are all perfectly serviceable and not unreasonable in the good times. But in the bad times, entire lives can come crashing down. Continue reading »

A blog reader enquired recently about the cohabitation legislation in Australia, asking: “Are you familiar with it and its effects and what is your opinion?”  This was an interesting request, so I asked Jenny Wilmot, a talented trainee solicitor here at Stowe Family Law and Christopher Othen, a senior associate at Sydney family law firm Barkus Doolan Kelly, to take a closer look.  Many thanks to both. Jenny has written a new post about their conclusions.

In a previous post, Cohabitation: England v Scotland, I predicted that the rather radical Cohabitation Bill put forward by Lord Lester in 2008 may have been too extreme for our government to accept into our legislation. I based this upon the fears that had arisen around the more moderate recommendations made by the Law Commission in 2007.

Had it been passed, the Cohabitation Bill would have given greater statutory protection to cohabitants, allowing the court to make a financial order if it felt that it was just and equitable to do so. The court would have had to take into account much of the same factors as it does for couples settling finances after the breakdown of the marriage, including the welfare of any relevant child, the length of cohabitation, contributions of each party (financial or otherwise), income and other financial resources and financial needs and obligations of the parties. Cohabitants would also have been given a chance to “opt out” of this process.

While this rather ballsy attempt by Lord Lester was supported by many family practitioners around the country, it still remains somewhat of a political impossibility for the foreseeable future. For some, the consequences of going further than the Law Commission’s conclusions would be too high.

A look at international variants of cohabitation law, however, can help us to view the situation in England and Wales in context. I have previously written about the Scottish system which does not give separating cohabitants the same rights as divorcing spouses, but does give weight to the fact that couples who have lived together for more than a year may be entitled to some financial rights, when one party has suffered an economic disadvantage due to the separation or if the defender has derived an economic advantage from the applicant’s contributions.

In Australia, cohabitation law goes further still. It has recently been amended following the passing of the Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008. Continue reading »

Stowe Family Law held its fifth annual outing at York Racecourse this weekend. We sponsored the main race of the meeting: the Stowe Family Law LLP Grand Cup. On the hottest day of the year (and according to BBC News, the hottest spot in the entire country), York was definitely the place to be!

The racing was terrific and more than 30,000 racegoers – a record turnout – attended the meeting.

I am pictured here with our guest Camilla Stowell, a senior client partner at Coutts London and Frank Arndt, who heads Stowe Family Law’s International Family Law Department in the paddock, watching the horses parading before our feature race.

Camilla is an expert on horses as well as banking. I followed her to the bookies on the course because, as she said, “the banker never loses!” Camilla went for an outsider and she was right. “Age of Reason”, ridden by Frankie Dettori, was the crowd’s favourite – but “Tactic”, ridden by Jimmy Quinn, was the winner.

Wandering through the crowds to one of the oldest and tiniest boxes on the course to watch the race, I noticed how the racegoers were all dressed up to the nines – and clutching the York race card, featuring Stowe Family Law on the front and back cover. I remarked to Camilla how strange it felt, seeing my photo there.

“Come on – you love it!” she laughed. Continue reading »

We have in-house forensic accountants here at Stowe Family Law. Their valuable work means that when clients come to see us for the first time, we can provide immediate advice about the likely scale and nature of a case. Our forensic accountants can also provide advice about the likely value of a client’s business for the purpose of a divorce.  This is useful because business values may be artificially inflated or deflated by the client, for a variety of reasons.

It is relatively unusual for a family law firm to have in-house forensic accountants, and our clients prize this service. In general, the demand for it appears to be increasing.

Financial Times journalist Jane Croft recently interviewed Nick White, the head of our forensic accountancy department, about high profile divorce cases and tracking down hidden assets. Extracts from the published feature appear below.

A model for breaking up

By Jane Croft

With so much at stake in big-money divorce cases, it is perhaps not surprising that there is often suspicion that some husbands are “hiding” their wealth so it cannot be included in any divorce settlement.

In these situations, divorce lawyers are turning to a small circle of specialist forensic accountants who can value a couple’s wealth and investigate allegations of non-disclosure. This can include tracing assets through a web of offshore locations to work out whether someone is underplaying their own net worth to win a cheaper settlement. Continue reading »

The Milky Way Galaxy is a spectacular collection of millions of stars; together, they form a bright, shining band across the night sky. On Wednesday night, I felt as if I was watching family law’s Milky Way. I was at a party in London, at the invitation of Nicholas Mostyn QC, to celebrate his ascension to the High Court. He is becoming Sir Nicholas Mostyn, one of Her Majesty’s Justices, who will henceforth use his fiercely brilliant brain adjudicating the cases that come before him. (Heaven help those advocates who will appear before him, because I don’t envy them their task of persuading him in their favour, one bit!)

I stood in the garden at Middle Temple, in the heart of legal London, sipping pink champagne and helping myself to fish and chips served in paper cones. I felt like a legal David Attenborough, watching stars from London’s family law firmament up close and personal. Of course they were all in dazzling, sociable mood. Every time I turned round I seemed to be bumping into this Lord Justice, that leading counsel, this famous solicitor or other, all having a jolly good time.

The party went on and when I left, I was a lot dizzier than when I had arrived –and it wasn’t from the champagne. I had been invited for the evening into the heart of the Family Law Establishment, which appears to be thriving. Now I am looking forward even more to the opening of Stowe Family Law’s newest office, in Central London, later this year.

The next day I attended a seminar given by some of the barristers at Nicholas Mostyn’s chambers, 1 Hare Court, and I was glad I’d stayed in London to attend it. It was an opportunity to hear from the barristers of those chambers, who are hoping to assume the mantle that Sir Nicholas is now passing on. And very interesting they proved to be. Continue reading »

This post won Family Lore’s Post of the Month Award for April 2010.

We were sitting around the table at dinner in a restaurant in Eilat. This time of year is for family and friends, so there were lots of young people chatting away. As it turned out, quite a few were newly qualified lawyers, or trainee lawyers doing their compulsory two years internship with various law firms in the City. The talk turned to the challenges of putting “real life” law, as opposed to training and theory, into practice. At that point I asked about how the ethical courses they had received stood up to the rigours of legal practice in the real world.

One of my nieces told me that on her course, professional ethics had been one of the most intensive subjects of all, requiring a higher pass rate. Failure in that subject meant failing the entire course.

I’m not surprised. When I qualified as a solicitor, Lord Denning’s words at the admission ceremony have stayed with me all my life, and I have often repeated them in this blog. One of this country’s most famous judges of all time, Lord Denning was also Master of the Rolls, and therefore the person who signed my admission into law.

“Always do what is right in your head, and you will never go wrong”, he said. How right he was.

However I would, with respect, like to add another phrase. I hope it will help young trainees or newly qualified solicitors who, through sheer lack of experience, might be tempted to stray from “the straight and narrow” as we English people tend to say.

It is this: Continue reading »