In the back of the mind
Family and private client law are usually treated as separate disciplines. At a recent Legal Week panel debate, however, a strong case was made for bringing family and private client teams together when it comes to advising wealthy clients.
June 18, 2009 at 04:46 AM
3 minute read
Legal Week's 'An audience with…' panel discuss family and private client law, with divorce, pre-nups and post-nups on the agenda. John Malpas reports on the evening
Family and private client law are usually treated as separate disciplines. At a recent Legal Week panel debate, however, a strong case was made for bringing family and private client teams together when it comes to advising wealthy clients.
It may not always be easy, but private client specialists are well placed to raise the delicate issue of divorce at a time when it couldn't be further from their clients' minds.
The debate, which took place at the London Stock Exchange on 4 June, was chaired by the leading family barrister Nicholas Francis QC. He urged the audience of private client lawyers to take divorce law into account when giving legal advice.
Panellist Simon Bruce, of Farrer & Co, briefed the audience on developments in the law relating to post-marital agreements. So-called 'post-nups' are similar to pre-nups, but are signed shortly after the marriage has taken place. They are regarded as giving wealthy individuals seeking to ring-fence assets in the event of a messy divorce greater protection than pre-nups.
When it comes to protracted and expensive divorce cases, London has recently gained some notoriety as reflected by its status as the divorce capital of the world.
While pre-nups and post-nups are becoming more popular, one sure way to avoid having your divorce case splashed all over the UK's national newspapers is to live somewhere else.
Panel member Catriona Syed, of Charles Russell, said the UK remained an attractive place for wealthy people to base themselves, despite some nervousness caused by the recent changes to the non-domicile tax regime.
But she added that it was vital for private client lawyers to take into account English divorce law when advising their clients on a possible relocation to the UK.
This is because of the way family law has been developing in this country, to the point where judges assume that divorcing couples should share their assets equally unless there are grounds to take a different approach. To make matters worse – at least from the point of view of many private client lawyers and their clients – the Family Division's judges are notorious for their willingness to target assets squirreled away in offshore trusts.
"Our divorce tax is regarded by some as the most extravagant in the world," said Francis. "It is our job to be proactive and tell people about it."
He went on to cite a recent battle between a divorcing couple over the location of their divorce case. The papers were filed in Paris and London on the same day. If the case was held in London, the extra cost to the husband promised to run into several million pounds.
And yet when Francis asked the audience whether they advised clients on the divorce law implications of relocating to new jurisdictions, few were willing to accept that this fell within their remit.
"I don't see it as my role," said one delegate bluntly. Cue much discussion during drinks after the session about the convergence of private client and family law.
An audience with… panellists
- Simon Bruce, Farrer & Co
- Geoff Cook, Jersey Finance
- James Stewart, Manches
- Catriona Syed, Charles Russell
- Nicholas Francis QC, 29 Bedford Row
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBCLP Mulls Merger Prospects as Profitability Lags, Partnership Shrinks
To Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trump and Latin America: Lawyers Brace for US's Hardline Approach to Region
- 2Weil Advances 18 to Partner, Largest Class Since 2021
- 3People and Purpose: AbbVie's GC on Leading With Impact and Inspiring Change
- 4Beef Between Two South Florida Law Firms Deepens With Suit Over Defamation
- 5Judge Skips Over Sanctions in Talc Bankruptcy: 'That’s A No'
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250