Comparing countries — more on spousal maintenance
By Suzanne Kingston
In a two-part analysis, we compared how different jurisdictions dealt with spousal maintenance. The countries surveyed were California, Cyprus, England and Wales, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Jersey, Malta, New York, New Zealand, Portugal, Scotland, South Africa, Spain and Switzerland.
Perhaps one of the most interesting points to come out of our analysis is the recognition that the label attributable to London as being the ‘divorce capital of the world’ does not necessarily derive from the court’s approach in respect of spousal maintenance. Upon reflection, it seems likely that the label has more to do with the overarching discretion of the court to reach a ‘fair’ outcome. The court is not constrained by a fixed formula or default marital property regime as it is in a number of other jurisdictions. Having said that, fairness obviously feeds into the determination of the appropriate level of spouse maintenance.
In its Report on Matrimonial Property, Needs and Agreements, the Law Commission was tasked with examining the extent of ‘financial needs’. In its report, it acknowledged that while practitioners know what is meant by ‘needs’ within the family law context, further guidance is needed for the growing body of litigants in person. The Law Commission proposed that authoritative guidance should be drafted on the meaning of financial needs on divorce, which would include a statement of independence…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Withers briefing.
News from Withers
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Withers
22 April 2014 marked ‘the largest reform of the family justice system any of us have seen or will see in our professional lifetimes’, according to the president of the Family Division.
Withers’ Graham Elliott discusses the points he found most interesting from this year’s Charity Tax Group annual meeting.
Analysis from The Lawyer
A merged Withers and Speechly Bircham would have scaled The Lawyer’s UK 200 with a turnover of about £170m, and created one of the world’s largest specialist private client teams. So what went wrong?