Joan Thompson claimed reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 from the estate of her partner, Wynford Hodge. He gave his £1.5m estate to Karla Evans and Agon Berisha, who were tenants of one of his properties. The will made no provision for Joan, who was financially dependent on Wynford and who had lived with him for 42 years.

Ernesto Colicci died unexpectedly on 18 January 2021 at the age of 66. Ernesto and his first wife Josephine married in 1982 and set up a business selling ice-cream from vans which grew over time to operating catering outlets in public places. A company was incorporated in 2003 and the business transferred into it. The shares in the business were held equally by Ernesto and Josephine.

Our specialist family lawyers work with you to support you through various family law issues

Against a backdrop of a wider court reform programme, the government has just announced (in June 2020) a radical change to the family justice system following the conclusion of a year-long review by an expert panel commissioned by the Ministry of Justice.

As a full-service law firm, we have undertaken work for private clients for nearly 180 years. We have a level of skill, knowledge and understanding that we are confident cannot be replicated elsewhere. The family law team at Wright Hassall has decades of experience providing expert help and advice.

Despite a recent case where a pre-nuptial agreement was not taken into account when considering the final financial award, pre-nuptial agreements continue to serve a very useful purpose for many families.

Welcome to season 2 of The WHorld of Employment Law! In this upcoming season, the Employment Law team at Wright Hassall will be focusing on family-friendly leave in the workplace.

A recent case, Armstrong v Armstrong, heard in the High Court in November 2024 involved claim made by a son against his father's estate on two grounds: proprietary estoppel and for financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1972.

Section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 allows the family court to make an order barring individuals from making further specified applications under the Children Act 1989 without permission of the court.

A mantra drummed into all embryonic litigators is: ‘do not lose sight of commerciality’. The overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Rules being that the Court should be able ‘to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost’. This is especially so with regard to claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the ‘Act’) where the Court is in essence being asked to conduct a balancing exercise to appropriately redistribute an estate in circumstances where a claimant argues that they have not been adequately provided for.