Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
(i) The husband himself has engaged a series of lawyers at different times, including senior counsel.
(iii) The family's substantial assets are scattered across at least three continents.
(iv) The tracking of money, accounts and policies has been problematic and protracted as will be illustrated later in this judgment.
In all the circumstances I accept that the wife has acted entirely reasonably in engaging and relying on her legal team to advance and protect her interests. They are entitled to be paid for what they have done and continue to do. It is well established that all of this gives rise to a need on her part to pay them � see G v G (Child Maintenance: Interim Costs Provision) [2009] EWHC 2080 (Fam) . I have discretion to order a payment to be made in respect of this need: I am satisfied that this is a case in which I should exercise that discretion and I now do so.
(c) The same applies to a second Lloyds account for �2,500 which was opened and closed in the same timescale as is set out above.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.