Our website is set to allow the use of cookies. For more information and to change settings click here. If you are happy with cookies please click "Continue" or simply continue browsing. Continue.

Family Law

The leading authority on all aspects of family law

Court of Protection Practice and Procedure Conference 2016

A comprehensive guide to best practice and current thinking

10 JUN 2015

G v G [2015] EWHC 1512 (Fam)

G v G [2015] EWHC 1512 (Fam)
(Family Division, Roberts J, 24 April 2015)

[The judicially approved judgment and accompanying headnote has now published in Family Law Reports [2016] 1 FLR 1314]

Financial Remedies – Appeal – Legal advice privilege – Allegation of non-disclosure – Evidence that the wife might have been aware of potential non-disclosure 2 years prior to application to appeal out of time

The full judgment is attached below

In 2010 a consent order was made in financial remedy proceedings achieving a clean break between the husband and wife.

In 2014 the wife sought permission to appeal out of time from the consent order alleging material non-disclosure by the husband. She claimed that she had not known that the husband rather than their three children was the primary beneficiary of two family trusts which had recently received payments amounting to £4m. The husband denied the allegations.

The wife issued an application seeking to prevent the husband’s legal team from continuing to act for him and a redaction of part of the husband’s evidence in the proceedings. The material consisted of an email suggesting that the wife was or might have been aware of potential issues of non-disclosure as long ago as 2012 but she failed to take any action for another 2 years. She further sought an injunction to prevent him from relying upon the use in the hearing of that material in respect of which she claimed legal advice privilege.

The husband sought a declaration that the material which the wife sought to exclude was not privileged and could be referred to as evidence in the proceedings.

The wife’s applications were dismissed. As a fact the judge found that there was no privilege attaching to either the email itself or the conversations which informed the content of the email. Even if there were there were no overriding circumstances which would justify the grant of injunctive relief on the basis of confidentiality to restrain the use of the information at the forthcoming hearing.

This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.

Case No: FD09D05089

Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWHC 1512 (Fam)

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 24/04/2015

Before :


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :


- and -


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr Martin Pointer QC and Mr Simon Webster (instructed by Messrs Farrer and Co) for the Applicant

Mr Andrew Green QC, Mr Tom Hickman and Mr Richard Sear (instructed by Messrs Pinsent Masons) for the Respondent

Hearing date: Friday 24th April 2015

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


G v G [2015] EWHC 1512 (Fam) 

Family Court Practice 2016, The

(Red Book)

Order your copy today and get the Autumn Supplement

More Info from £465.00
Available in Family Law Online
Emergency Remedies in the Family Courts

Emergency Remedies in the Family Courts

"A very good tool for the busy family lawyer" Solicitors Journal

Available in Family Law Online
Subscribe to our newsletters