Welcoming Christopher Stirling to 1COR as an Associate Member - Apr 2023
Financial Remedies
Christopher practises all aspects of matrimonial finance but specialises in matters involving complicated assets and involving aspects of company, property and trusts law. Christopher is often instructed in matrimonial cases that involve property disputes with third parties – intervener proceedings. Christopher has lectured on both the procedure in relation to intervener disputes and also on the impact of the bankruptcy jurisdiction on matrimonial proceedings.
Christopher also regularly advises and drafts ante and post nuptial agreements and separation agreements for both married and unmarried parties. He has lectured on this topic and recently made a podcast discussing developments in the law in this area.
As part of his civil practice Christopher is often asked to advise in relation to claims of professional negligence in respect of matrimonial proceedings.
Selected Cases
- Kremen (also known as Agrest) v Agrest [2011] 2 FLR 506 – Court of Appeal decision on setting aside transfers of property from husband to intervener, through BVI company, designed to frustrate wife’s claim under the matrimonial legislation – considering what transferee must show to avail himself of “equity’s darling” defence.
- Kremen (also known as Agrest) v Agrest (Everclear Ltd (BVI) intervening) [2011] 2 FLR 490 – First instance decision in the above where Mostyn J also considered the circumstances in which it was appropriate to pierce the corporate veil in matrimonial finance cases.
- Kremen v Agrest (Financial Remedy: Non Disclosure: Post Nuptial Agreement) [2012] 2 FLR 414 – Significant review of law post Radmacher in relation to the enforceability of post nuptial agreements. Also considered the extent to which the court can infer hidden assets where spouse refuses to provide proper disclosure.
- S v M [2012] All ER (D) 175 (Nov); [2013] 1 FLR 1173 – Appeal in relation to interim maintenance where husband supported by (and any maintenance ultimately to be paid by) member of extended family – Coleridge J gave guidance on the forensic exercise necessary before any award could be made in these circumstances.
- Kremen v Agrest (Chesnokov Intervening) [2013] EWCA Civ 41; [2013] 2 FLR 187 – Considering balancing exercise between rights of third party creditor and spouse when considering making charging order absolute at same time as final matrimonial order. Review of guidelines in Harman v Glencross and an example of the exceptional case
where no charging order was made.
