While some claims require an immediate and robust response because they could influence decisions, many others have little or no bearing on the legal outcome of the case. Knowing the difference can save considerable time, legal costs, and emotional strain.

Not all allegations are equal

Allegations made during divorce vary enormously in both seriousness and legal relevance. They can range from complaints about someone’s personality or lifestyle through to accusations involving financial misconduct, domestic abuse or risks to children.

Common examples include:

• Allegations of hiding or wasting assets
• Claims that one parent is deliberately alienating a child
• Accusations of domestic abuse or coercive control
• Claims of controlling financial behaviour
• Allegations of adultery or infidelity
• Complaints about poor communication or selfish behaviour
• Accusations of excessive spending
• Claims that a spouse has deliberately reduced their income
• Allegations concerning alcohol or drug misuse
• Complaints about new relationships after separation

Some of these issues may become central to court proceedings, although others may have little legal significance despite being emotionally upsetting.

A common mistake is assuming that because an allegation feels unfair or offensive, it automatically needs a detailed legal response. In reality, responding to every criticism often distracts attention from the issues that genuinely matter, and quickly increases costs.

The impact of no-fault divorce

Since the introduction of no-fault divorce, spouses no longer need to prove that the other party behaved unreasonably or committed adultery in order to obtain a divorce. The court is therefore not interested in looking at who was responsible for the breakdown of the marriage. As a result, many allegations concerning day-to-day matrimonial behaviour have no direct impact on whether the divorce itself proceeds.

This can surprise separating couples who expect the court to examine every grievance accumulated over many years. In most cases, it will not.

Allegations relating to financial matters

Financial allegations often require more careful consideration because they may influence financial remedy proceedings. Examples include allegations that one spouse has:

• Hidden assets
• Failed to disclose bank accounts
• Transferred property to relatives
• Deliberately reduced their earnings
• Dissipated matrimonial assets through excessive spending or gambling
• Failed to disclose cryptocurrency or overseas investments
• Forged financial documents

Unlike complaints about personality or relationship behaviour, these allegations can directly affect the fairness of any financial settlement. Family courts expect both parties to provide full and frank financial disclosure, and if assets have been concealed or disclosure has been deliberately manipulated, the court has extensive powers to investigate further.

That said, suspicion alone is rarely enough; serious financial allegations should be supported by documentary evidence of wrongdoing such as bank statements, company accounts, tax returns, property records or transaction histories.

Allegations affecting children

Where children are involved, allegations are assessed differently because the court’s primary consideration is always the welfare of the child. Allegations that may become significant include:

• Physical abuse
• Emotional abuse
• Coercive or controlling behaviour
• Neglect
• Alcohol or substance misuse affecting parenting
• Domestic violence witnessed by children
• Child alienation
• Failure to safeguard children

If an allegation suggests that a child may be at risk, the court is unlikely to ignore it. Depending upon the circumstances, the court may order safeguarding enquiries by Cafcass, obtain police or local authority information, direct fact-finding hearings or require further evidence before making decisions about child arrangements.

General behaviour complaints

Lengthy lists of complaints frequently appear in correspondence between separating spouses. Examples might include accusations that someone:

• Worked too much
• Was emotionally unavailable
• Spent insufficient time with family
• Forgot birthdays
• Failed to support a career
• Was untidy
• Had a difficult personality
• Began dating too soon after separation

Although these issues may explain why the relationship ended, they rarely assist the court in determining financial settlements or child arrangements. Responding line-by-line to every criticism often serves only to prolong conflict and increase costs.

When ignoring allegations may be the better option

Ignoring an allegation does not mean accepting that it is true; instead, it can be a strategic decision where the accusation has no legal relevance. There are several reasons responding to every allegation can be counterproductive. First, lengthy denials frequently encourage further accusations, creating an endless cycle of hostile correspondence.

Secondly, legal costs increase significantly when solicitors are asked to answer complaints that have no bearing on the legal issues. Thirdly, attention can become diverted from resolving the matters that genuinely require negotiation.

Finally, an emotional response may inadvertently escalate conflict, making agreement more difficult to achieve. Experienced family solicitors often encourage clients to focus only on allegations capable of influencing the legal outcome of a case.

When it is important to respond

A prompt and carefully considered response may be appropriate where allegations:

• Could affect arrangements for children
• Suggest domestic abuse or safeguarding concerns
• Accuse someone of dishonesty in financial disclosure
• Allege hidden assets
• Accuse a party of breaching court orders
• Could damage professional reputation where evidence is required
• May influence interim applications before the court

The response should usually remain factual, proportionate, and supported by evidence wherever possible.

The risks of false or exaggerated allegations

Where the court concludes that accusations have been deliberately fabricated or grossly exaggerated, this may undermine the credibility of the person making them. In cases involving children, unfounded allegations can damage trust and may complicate future proceedings if the court concludes that one parent has attempted to manipulate the process.

False allegations may also increase legal costs, prolong proceedings, and make settlement considerably more difficult. Although family courts recognise that genuine victims sometimes struggle to produce documentary evidence, they also expect parties to approach proceedings honestly and proportionately.

Practical steps when faced with numerous allegations

Rather than responding immediately, it is often sensible to take a structured approach. You should read the allegations carefully before replying and distinguish between those that could affect legal issues and those that are simply expressions of anger or frustration.

Preserve relevant evidence rather than deleting emails or text messages; keep financial documents organised, avoid responding emotionally on social media; and continue complying with disclosure obligations and court directions. Where children are involved, maintain a child-focused approach rather than allowing accusations to influence parenting decisions.

Perhaps most importantly, seek legal advice before preparing lengthy responses. A solicitor can identify which allegations genuinely require a response and which can safely be left unanswered.

This objective approach often helps reduce conflict and allows both parties to move the case forward more efficiently.

The post Allegations Between Spouses During Divorce: When To Respond And When To Ignore appeared first on Major Family Law.

Although many parents assume they have an automatic legal right to know where their child is at all times, the legal position is considerably more complicated. Understanding where the legal boundaries lie can help separated parents avoid unnecessary conflict while ensuring that decisions remain focused on the child’s welfare.

There is no automatic right to track a child

There is no legislation that expressly gives either parent the right to install tracking software or devices on their children. But on the other hand, there is no law which outright prohibits it either. The law instead asks whether a parent’s actions are reasonable and whether they promote or undermine the child’s welfare.

Parents who share parental responsibility are expected to make important decisions together wherever possible. Introducing a system that allows one parent to monitor the child’s movements throughout contact with the other parent may therefore become a significant issue, particularly if it affects trust between the parents or interferes with the child’s relationship with either parent.

Does it matter which tracking device is used?

Many teenagers now carry smartphones that have built-in location sharing through services such as Apple’s Find My or Google’s Family Link. Some younger children wear GPS-enabled watches so parents know they have arrived safely at school or after-school activities. Other parents use Bluetooth tracking devices, such as AirTags or similar products, by placing them inside a child’s school bag or coat.

Although the legal principles remain broadly the same regardless of the technology used, the degree of intrusion may differ considerably. For example, a GPS smartwatch worn openly by a young child for safety purposes may appear far less controversial than secretly placing a tracking device inside the child’s belongings with no one else’s knowledge. Equally, temporary location sharing during a school trip may be viewed differently from permanent 24-hour monitoring that continues throughout time spent with the other parent.

The court is likely to consider not only the existence of tracking but also how intrusive it is, why it has been introduced, and whether it serves a genuine protective purpose.

The child’s age and maturity can make a significant difference

Age is often one of the most important considerations. A five-year-old who cannot safely travel independently presents very different considerations from a mature and largely independent sixteen-year-old. The older and more autonomous a child becomes, the greater weight is likely to be given to their own views regarding privacy and self-government.

Family courts increasingly recognise that older children should gradually assume greater control over decisions affecting their everyday lives. Constant electronic monitoring of an older teenager may therefore become increasingly difficult to justify unless there are genuine safeguarding concerns. For younger children, however, parents generally have greater scope to make decisions intended to protect their safety.

The child’s level of maturity can also become relevant. Some children may fully understand how location sharing works and willingly agree to it, while others may feel uncomfortable or pressured into accepting monitoring without fully appreciating the consequences.

How does parental responsibility affect the position?

Where both parents have parental responsibility, neither parent has unrestricted authority to make every decision without consulting the other. However, the law distinguishes between routine day-to-day decisions and major decisions affecting the child’s upbringing.

Whether introducing electronic tracking falls into one category or the other will depend upon the facts of the case. A parent may argue that enabling location sharing on a child’s phone is simply an everyday safety measure, but the other may consider it an intrusive step affecting the child’s privacy and their own parenting time.

If a disagreement arises, the court will examine whether the decision should have been discussed jointly and whether one parent’s unilateral actions were reasonable. It is important to remember that parental responsibility exists to benefit the child rather than to give either parent greater control over the other.

When might tracking be considered reasonable?

There are many situations where electronic tracking may be entirely appropriate. For example, parents may both agree that a younger child should wear a GPS watch while travelling independently to school.

Location sharing may also be sensible where a child has additional needs, medical vulnerabilities or a history of becoming lost. Likewise, if a teenager frequently walks home alone late in the evening, both parents may welcome temporary location sharing as an additional safety measure.

Essentially, tracking introduced primarily for safeguarding reasons, agreed by both parents and understood by the child, is far less likely to become problematic than tracking motivated by suspicion, mistrust, or attempts to supervise the other parent’s lifestyle.

Could court proceedings become necessary?

A parent who believes tracking is placing the child at risk, damaging the parent-child relationship, or amounting to inappropriate surveillance may ask the family court to rule on the dispute.

The court will not decide the case by asking whether technology is inherently good or bad; instead, the judge will consider the child’s welfare as the paramount consideration.

Evidence may include:

• Why the tracking was introduced
• Whether both parents were consulted
• The child’s age and wishes
• The level of intrusion involved
• Any safeguarding concerns
• The impact upon the child’s relationship with both parents

Outcomes will vary considerably because every family and their circumstances are different. Some outcomes include the court permitting continued tracking, requiring changes to how it operates, or ordering it to stop altogether.

If you are unsure whether tracking your child’s location is legally appropriate, or if you are involved in a dispute about electronic monitoring following separation or divorce, obtaining specialist family law advice can help you understand your rights, your responsibilities and the options available to protect both your child’s welfare and your ongoing parenting relationship.

The post Tracking Your Child’s Location When They Are With The Other Parent: What The Law Says appeared first on Major Family Law.

Annual performance bonuses, commission payments, deferred incentive schemes, and long-term share awards can all make it difficult to determine what income is available and what should be taken into account when negotiating a financial settlement.

Why bonuses create additional complexity

Unlike a fixed salary, bonuses are rarely guaranteed and often depend on company performance, individual targets, market conditions, or the discretion of an employer. Some bonuses are paid annually, while others are deferred over several years or delivered through shares, restricted stock units, or long-term incentive plans.

This means that at the point financial negotiations take place, there may be uncertainty about:

• Whether a bonus will be paid
• The amount of any future payment
• When it will be received
• Whether part of it has already been earned during the marriage
• Whether it relates to work carried out before or after separation

These issues require careful analysis because they can have a significant impact on the overall fairness of a settlement.

What might bonus manipulation look like?

Not every unexpected change to a bonus should be treated with suspicion; businesses frequently alter payment structures in response to commercial pressures, regulatory changes or wider economic conditions.

However, concerns may arise where there appears to be an unusual change in the way a bonus is being paid shortly before or during divorce proceedings.

Examples might include:

• An annual bonus suddenly being postponed until after financial proceedings conclude
• Salary being reduced while future share incentives increase
• A bonus being replaced with deferred compensation
• An employee requesting that payment be delayed
• Significant income being redirected into pension contributions or share schemes with no previous pattern
• Commission payments being intentionally delayed where the individual has some influence over payment timing

While none of these situations automatically indicate wrongdoing, they may prompt further investigation if they coincide with ongoing financial remedy proceedings.

Can someone deliberately delay or restructure a bonus?

Whether this is possible depends largely on the individual’s role and the employer’s reward policies. Many employees have little or no control over when bonuses are awarded because payment dates are fixed by company policy or determined by remuneration committees. Public companies, banks, and regulated financial institutions often operate under strict bonus rules which individual employees cannot alter.

On the other hand, directors, company owners, and senior executives may have greater influence over how and when a bonus is paid, particularly within privately owned businesses. For example, an owner-managed company may have discretion over whether profits are distributed as salary, dividends, bonuses or retained within the business.

Where a spouse exercises significant control over these decisions, the court may look carefully at whether remuneration has genuinely changed for commercial reasons or whether financial arrangements have been altered to reduce claims during divorce.

Legitimate reasons why bonuses may be delayed

A delayed bonus should never automatically be viewed as evidence of manipulation, as there are many genuine reasons payment may occur later than originally expected. For example, changing business performance, regulatory approval requirements, company restructures, mergers, acquisitions, revised remuneration policies, liquidity concerns, or the introduction of new long-term incentive schemes.

Employers may also defer bonuses to improve staff retention or comply with industry-specific rules, particularly within financial services. Sometimes bonuses are delayed because performance targets have not yet been assessed or because audited financial results have not been finalised. These are ordinary commercial decisions that occur regardless of any employee’s personal circumstances.

How do courts distinguish genuine decisions from manipulation?

Judges recognise that businesses evolve and remuneration structures regularly change. Equally, they understand some individuals may attempt to present a misleading picture of their finances. The court will often examine the wider context, asking questions such as:

• Has the bonus structure followed the same pattern over several years?
• Did the changes occur before divorce became likely?
• Do colleagues receive bonuses under the same revised arrangements?
• Was the decision made independently by the employer?
• Does the employer have written policies supporting the change?
• Is there evidence showing that the individual influenced the decision?

Rather than looking at one isolated payment, the court frequently considers the overall history of earnings over several years. Consistent historical patterns can provide valuable evidence when assessing whether a recent change appears genuine or unusual.

What evidence may be relevant?

Where bonus arrangements are disputed, several different types of evidence may help establish the true position.

Employment contracts often explain how bonuses are calculated and whether they are discretionary or contractual. Previous years’ payslips and P60s may demonstrate consistent bonus patterns over time, and annual remuneration statements can identify deferred awards, share incentives, and long-term payment arrangements.

Correspondence from employers may explain why a payment has been delayed or why remuneration structures have changed; board minutes or company bonus policies may also assist where a spouse has significant influence over payment decisions. In addition, tax returns, dividend records, and company accounts can provide further context where remuneration is linked to business ownership.

Rather than focusing on a single document, the court usually considers the overall financial picture.

What happens if deliberate manipulation is discovered?

The court can make findings based upon the available evidence and may infer that undisclosed income or assets exist if financial disclosure has been incomplete. A settlement reached through dishonest disclosure may also be vulnerable to challenge after it has been approved if material information later comes to light.

In some cases, the court may also take litigation conduct into account when considering legal costs, particularly where unnecessary expense has resulted from failures to provide honest disclosure. The overriding expectation is that both parties approach financial proceedings openly and transparently.

Reaching a fair settlement despite uncertain bonuses

Bonuses do not always fit neatly into financial negotiations because they are often unpredictable. Rather than seeking mathematical precision, the court aims to produce an outcome that is fair when viewed as a whole.

That may involve considering historic earnings over several years instead of focusing solely on one exceptional payment. It may also involve distinguishing between income that has effectively been earned during the marriage and genuinely speculative future rewards.

Where uncertainty exists, settlements can sometimes be structured to reflect future events rather than relying entirely on estimates made at one point in time. This flexibility can help ensure that neither spouse benefits unfairly from unexpected windfalls nor suffers because expected bonuses never materialise.

The post Bonus Manipulation In Divorce: How To Reach A Fair Settlement appeared first on Major Family Law.

Recent discussions by the UK Government about introducing stronger restrictions on children’s access to social media have added another layer of uncertainty for families. Parents who already disagree about their child’s online presence may wonder whether one of them can unilaterally prohibit social media use altogether, particularly where a child spends time between households.

The UK’s proposed social media restrictions

There has been growing debate in the UK about introducing tighter controls on children’s use of social media. Although online platforms already have minimum age requirements, concerns remain about how effectively these are enforced. Government discussions have included stronger age verification measures, increased regulation of platforms, and additional protections designed to reduce children’s exposure to harmful content.

The Online Safety Act has already placed greater responsibilities on technology companies to protect children from illegal and harmful material. However, proposals continue to change as policymakers consider whether additional restrictions are necessary to address issues such as cyberbullying, inappropriate content, addictive platform design, and the impact of excessive screen time on mental health.

While these developments may influence how platforms operate, they do not replace the day-to-day decisions parents must make about their own children. Even if new restrictions are introduced nationally, separated parents may still disagree about what is appropriate for their individual child.

Can one parent ban social media if the other disagrees?

In most cases, separated parents both hold parental responsibility. This means they each have legal rights and responsibilities to make important decisions affecting their child’s upbringing.

There is no specific law stating that one parent can unilaterally stop a child from using social media simply because they believe it is harmful. Equally, there is no automatic right for the other parent to allow unrestricted access.

Many everyday parenting decisions can be made independently while the child is staying with that parent. For example, each household may have different bedtimes, meal routines, or television rules. Social media often falls somewhere between an everyday parenting decision and a significant welfare issue.

If one parent believes limited, supervised access is appropriate while the other believes social media should not be used at all, neither parent automatically has the final say solely because they feel more strongly about the issue.

The starting point should always be discussion, compromise, and an assessment of what is genuinely in the child’s best interests.

What if one parent allows social media despite the other’s objections?

Parents sometimes assume that allowing access against the wishes of the other parent is unlawful. In most situations, this is not the case. Simply allowing a child to have a social media account is unlikely to amount to a criminal offence, and there are no criminal penalties because separated parents disagree about online access.

However, repeated disregard for legitimate concerns can create wider difficulties. If one parent continually ignores agreed parenting arrangements or encourages behaviour that places the child at risk, this could become relevant in future family court proceedings.

For example, if a parent knowingly allows a child to use platforms that exposes them to inappropriate contact, encourages online behaviour that affects the child’s emotional wellbeing or deliberately undermines agreements made between the parents, the court may consider this as part of a broader assessment of parenting decisions.

The court is unlikely to intervene simply because parents have different parenting styles. However, where the disagreement reflects more serious concerns about safeguarding or welfare, judicial involvement may become necessary.

Can parents insist upon identical rules in both households?

Unless there is a court order dealing specifically with the issue, each parent usually retains discretion over everyday parenting decisions during the time the child spends with them. This means one household may prohibit TikTok while the other allows it under supervision. One parent may require all devices to remain downstairs overnight, while the other permits phones in bedrooms.

Although this inconsistency can be frustrating, family courts recognise that separated parents will often have different parenting approaches. That said, consistency can significantly benefit children, and setting clear expectations often reduces confusion and prevents children from feeling caught between conflicting rules.

Rather than attempting to control each other’s time with the children, parents should be encouraged to agree a shared digital parenting plan. Such an agreement might include:

• Appropriate minimum ages for different platforms
• Daily screen time limits
• Rules regarding privacy settings
• Restrictions on sharing photographs or personal information
• Expectations about online gaming and messaging
• Procedures for reporting online bullying or inappropriate contact

Although such agreements are not automatically legally binding, they can reduce conflict and provide a useful framework for co-parenting.

Does the child’s age make a difference?

A seven-year-old and a fifteen-year-old present very different considerations for a parent. Younger children generally require greater supervision and may not fully appreciate online risks, while older teenagers may rely on social media to maintain friendships, organise school activities and participate in social life. Parents should also remember that many platforms set their own minimum age requirements, although these are not always rigorously enforced.

As children mature, family courts increasingly recognise that they require greater independence. A complete ban that may be appropriate for a younger child could become unrealistic for an older teenager approaching adulthood.

Does maturity matter as well as age?

Two children of exactly the same age may demonstrate very different levels of emotional maturity. One child may understand online privacy, recognise scams, report inappropriate content and manage their time responsibly; another may be more vulnerable to peer pressure, excessive screen use or online manipulation.

Parents should consider factors including:

• Emotional resilience
• Understanding of online safety
• Previous experience with digital devices
• Ability to recognise inappropriate behaviour
• Willingness to follow agreed rules

These practical considerations may be more important than age alone. However, as children become older and more mature, their views carry increasing weight.

If a dispute reaches court, the child’s wishes and feelings may be taken into account where appropriate. This does not mean the court simply follows the child’s preference; instead, their views form one factor within the wider welfare assessment.

While technology will continue to evolve, parents who maintain constructive communication, remain informed about online risks, and focus on their child’s individual needs are usually best placed to deal with these changes together.

The post Social Media Restrictions And Shared Parenting: Who Has The Final Say? appeared first on Major Family Law.

The difficulty is that the abuse may not involve physical contact or obvious threats at all. Instead, it can happen quietly through phones, social media accounts, emails, online banking, shared devices, or digital records. The impact can nevertheless be serious, particularly when someone is already vulnerable due to the stress of separation.

What is digital gaslighting?

Digital gaslighting is a form of manipulation that involves a person attempting to make someone question their own memory, judgment, understanding, or perception of events by using digital information or communications.

In a relationship or divorce context, it may involve a spouse denying messages they have sent despite evidence showing otherwise, deleting conversations and claiming a discussion never happened, altering digital records, selectively sharing screenshots to create a misleading impression, or suggesting that the other person is imagining events that can be proven through digital evidence.

For example, a spouse may send a series of hostile messages during an argument and later delete their messages from a shared device, leaving only the other person’s responses visible. They may then accuse their former partner of being unreasonable or aggressive based on an incomplete version of the conversation.

Another example could involve someone repeatedly changing passwords to shared accounts and then insisting that access was never available, causing the other person to doubt their own recollection of previous arrangements.

The key feature of digital gaslighting is the deliberate attempt to distort reality, control information, or undermine another person’s confidence in their own understanding of events.

What is cyberbullying in divorce situations?

Cyberbullying generally involves repeated abusive, threatening, humiliating, or intimidating behaviour carried out through digital platforms. In the context of divorce, it may involve harassment through text messages, emails, social media, messaging applications, or other online platforms.

Examples include:

• Sending repeated abusive or threatening messages after separation
• Posting damaging or humiliating comments about an ex-partner online
• Contacting friends, family members or colleagues with allegations intended to embarrass or isolate someone
• Using social media to monitor, intimidate, or provoke a former spouse
• Creating fake accounts or impersonating someone online
• Sharing private information, photographs, or communications without consent

Cyberbullying and digital gaslighting often overlap, and a person may use cyberbullying tactics to intimidate someone while also attempting to manipulate their perception of events. For instance, a former spouse may send hundreds of hostile messages, later deny doing so, and accuse the recipient of exaggerating the situation.

Although the terms digital gaslighting and cyberbullying are widely used socially, the family courts do not make findings of digital gaslighting as a separate legal wrong. Instead, they examine the underlying conduct and consider whether it falls within recognised legal principles.

When can digital behaviour amount to domestic abuse?

The definition of domestic abuse includes conduct such as controlling or coercive behaviour, emotional or psychological abuse, harassment, intimidation, and threats. Digital behaviour may amount to domestic abuse where it forms part of a wider pattern of controlling, threatening or degrading conduct.

For example, a spouse repeatedly monitoring a partner’s location through a device without consent may be relevant evidence of controlling behaviour. Similarly, constantly demanding access to messages, checking social media accounts, controlling passwords or using technology to restrict someone’s independence may form part of a pattern of coercive control.

The courts will usually look at the behaviour as a whole rather than considering one isolated incident. A single unpleasant message may not necessarily amount to domestic abuse, but a sustained campaign of intimidation, surveillance, and manipulation may do.

How can digital abuse affect divorce proceedings?

The divorce process itself is based on the legal ending of the marriage rather than deciding who is to blame for the relationship breakdown. However, digital abuse may become relevant in other areas connected with divorce, particularly financial remedies and children matters.

In financial proceedings, abusive digital behaviour may be relevant where it demonstrates dishonesty, attempts to conceal assets, or efforts to manipulate financial information. For example, deleting financial records, changing online banking access, hiding cryptocurrency accounts, or altering digital documents may become important issues if there is a dispute about disclosure.

The family court expects both parties to provide full and frank financial disclosure. Attempts to hide or manipulate evidence can have serious consequences, including adverse findings against the person responsible.

Digital conduct may also become relevant where one spouse alleges the other has acted dishonestly or improperly during negotiations. Evidence such as emails, messages, or electronic records may help establish what was agreed or what information was provided.

How can digital abuse affect child arrangements?

When deciding child arrangements, the court’s primary consideration is the welfare of the child. The court will consider whether any behaviour by a parent creates a risk of harm to the child or affects their ability to provide safe and effective parenting.

Digital abuse between parents can become relevant where it affects communication, exposes children to conflict, or shows controlling behaviour. For example,  a parent who uses children as messengers, sends them inappropriate information about the other parent online, or involves them in adult disputes may also raise welfare concerns.

Similarly, attempts to monitor the other parent through devices, social media accounts, or tracking technology may evidence ongoing controlling behaviour.

The court is unlikely to restrict contact simply because parents argue online. However, where digital conduct forms part of a wider pattern of intimidation, harassment or emotional harm, it may influence decisions about communication methods, handovers or the level of involvement each parent should have.

Practical steps if you believe you are experiencing digital abuse

If someone believes their devices or accounts are being monitored, they should consider whether their phone, computer, or online accounts are secure. Practical steps you can take include changing passwords, using two-factor authentication, checking account recovery information, reviewing connected devices, and updating security settings. It may also be sensible to use a separate email account for confidential communications.

People should also consider limiting unnecessary digital contact with an ex-partner. Where communication about children is required, using a parenting app or keeping messages factual and child-focused can help create a clear record.

Anyone experiencing digital abuse during or after separation should take steps to preserve evidence safely and protect their online security. Early advice can help prevent digital behaviour from escalating and ensure that relevant evidence is properly presented if court proceedings become necessary.

The post Divorce Involving Digital Gaslighting Or Cyberbullying: What The Law Says appeared first on Major Family Law.

Generally speaking, family courts do not automatically prevent a parent from spending time with their child simply because they have used drugs. Equally, the court will not ignore evidence that drug use is affecting parenting, creating instability, or placing a child at risk.

The court’s role is to make decisions that promote the child’s welfare above everything else. Whether drug use is relevant depends upon the nature of the drug use, the surrounding circumstances and, most importantly, the effect it has on the child.

The child’s welfare is always the court’s priority

Whenever the court decides arrangements for a child, it applies the welfare principle under the Children Act 1989. Judges are not there to punish parents for poor lifestyle choices or moral failings; instead, they consider whether a parent’s behaviour affects their ability to meet the child’s needs safely and consistently.

Drug use therefore becomes relevant when it affects matters such as:

• A parent’s judgment and decision-making
• Their ability to supervise the child safely
• Emotional availability and consistency
• Exposure of the child to dangerous people or environments
• Financial instability caused by addiction
• Neglect of the child’s everyday needs
• Domestic abuse or criminal behaviour linked to substance misuse

Does all drug use carry the same weight?

The court distinguishes between occasional recreational use, dependency or addiction, misuse of prescribed medication, and medication taken lawfully under medical supervision.

For example, someone who experimented with cannabis several years ago but has since lived a stable life may present a very different picture from someone regularly using cocaine immediately before collecting their child from school.

Likewise, a parent with an addiction that causes repeated relapses, missed contact sessions, financial difficulties, or chaotic behaviour is likely to face much greater scrutiny than someone whose isolated use has never affected their parenting.

What about prescribed medication and medical cannabis?

Many parents responsibly take medication for chronic pain, anxiety, ADHD, epilepsy, or other medical conditions while caring safely for their children every day. Similarly, where medical cannabis has been lawfully prescribed by a specialist clinician, the court is unlikely to criticise its legitimate use simply because it is cannabis-based.

However, the court may examine whether any prescribed medication causes side effects that impair parenting, whether medication is being taken as directed, and whether it affects the parent’s ability to supervise the child safely. The existence of a prescription alone neither guarantees nor prevents concerns; again, the impact on parenting remains the key issue.

Does historic drug use matter?

Historic drug use can be relevant, but it rarely carries the same weight as current substance misuse. The court will usually consider questions such as:

• How long ago did the drug use occur?
• Was treatment successfully completed?
• Has the parent remained drug-free?
• Have there been any relapses?
• Has the parent demonstrated stability since then?
• What evidence supports their recovery?

Someone with a long history of recovery, stable employment, and consistent parenting is likely to be viewed very differently from someone whose drug use remains recent or ongoing. Family courts recognise people can and do recover from addiction.

What evidence does the court usually require?

Judges expect evidence before making decisions that significantly affect a parent’s relationship with their child. Depending on the circumstances, evidence may include hair strand drug testing, urine testing, or other toxicology reports. Hair strand testing is commonly used because it can provide information about drug use over several months rather than only recent consumption.

Police records may also become relevant where there have been arrests, drug-related offences or incidents involving children.

Medical records sometimes provide important evidence where healthcare professionals have documented concerns about substance misuse, treatment, or prescriptions.

Social services records may also carry considerable weight if children’s services have investigated safeguarding concerns or undertaken assessments. Witness evidence can also be important, particularly from individuals who have personally observed concerning behaviour.

Can allegations alone affect child arrangements?

If allegations are unsupported or disputed, the court may first decide whether further investigation is needed before making any substantial changes. Sometimes the court will list a separate fact-finding hearing to determine whether allegations are true.

Until findings have been made, the court must carefully balance protecting the child from potential harm while avoiding unfair restrictions based solely on unproven accusations.

What if someone refuses drug testing?

If testing could fairly resolve disputed allegations and no reasonable explanation exists for declining, the refusal may influence how the court assesses the evidence overall. A parent may have legitimate objections to the type of testing proposed, concerns about proportionality, or practical reasons why testing cannot immediately take place. Ultimately, the judge considers the wider picture rather than treating refusal as conclusive proof.

Can contact continue with safeguards?

Family courts recognise the importance of children maintaining meaningful relationships with both parents wherever this can be achieved safely. Rather than ending contact altogether, judges may introduce safeguards designed to reduce any identified risks.

These can include supervised contact at a contact centre or in the presence of an agreed family member, indirect contact while concerns are investigated, requirements for regular drug testing, restrictions on overnight stays, agreements that the parent must not consume drugs before or during contact, or a gradual increase in time with the child as evidence of recovery becomes available.

These arrangements are intended to protect children while allowing relationships to continue wherever possible.

What should a parent do if they genuinely have concerns?

If you honestly believe the other parent’s drug use places your child at risk, it is important to act calmly and responsibly. Keep a clear record of incidents, including dates, times, and specific observations, and focus on facts rather than assumptions. You should also keep any relevant messages, photographs, or other evidence.

If professionals such as teachers, doctors or social workers have expressed concerns, keep records of those communications. Where there is an immediate safeguarding issue, appropriate agencies should be informed without delay.

For parents involved in child arrangements disputes, obtaining early legal advice can help ensure that concerns are presented fairly, evidence is gathered appropriately, and the child’s welfare remains the central focus throughout the proceedings.

The post How Drug Use Can Affect Child Arrangements Orders (And What Evidence May Be Needed) appeared first on Major Family Law.

You may worry that important facts can no longer be proved or that they will hide assets from the court. The good news is that the family courts take these issues seriously and have various powers to deal with parties who fail to comply with their legal obligations.

What does destroying evidence mean?

Destroying evidence covers any deliberate act intended to prevent relevant information from being available during legal proceedings. This includes, but is not limited to, deleting emails, destroying financial paperwork, disposing of business records, wiping computer hard drives, deleting cloud storage, throwing away diaries or notebooks, altering documents, or deliberately withholding evidence that should be disclosed.

Evidence can exist in many different forms, and may include paper documents, emails, text messages, WhatsApp conversations, social media messages, photographs, digital files, spreadsheets, recordings, or financial records. The key question is whether the material is relevant to issues that the court may need to determine.

Does deleting emails, text messages, or WhatsApp chats count as destroying evidence?

Deleting emails, text messages or WhatsApp conversations does not automatically amount to wrongdoing, and many people routinely clear old messages from their devices without giving it much thought.

However, the position changes where someone deliberately deletes communications because they know they may become relevant to divorce or financial remedy proceedings. For example, deleting messages discussing hidden bank accounts, transfers of money to relatives, or the disposal of valuable assets could be viewed very differently from simply deleting old social conversations.

It is worth remembering that deleting information from a device does not necessarily mean it has disappeared forever. Digital evidence can sometimes be recovered from backups, cloud storage, email servers, or through forensic examination of electronic devices.

What if financial documents have been destroyed?

Each party is expected to provide full, frank and honest disclosure of their financial circumstances. This allows the court to make informed decisions about how assets should be divided fairly.

It is also important to remember that parties involved in financial remedy proceedings owe an ongoing duty of full and frank disclosure. This obligation continues throughout the proceedings and requires both spouses to provide accurate, complete, and up-to-date financial information.

If bank statements, business accounts, tax returns, or accounting records have been deliberately destroyed, this may make it more difficult to understand the true financial picture.

However, it does not necessarily prevent the court from reaching conclusions. Banks, accountants, employers, pension providers, Companies House and HM Revenue & Customs may all hold copies of financial information. Business records can also be reconstructed from accounting software, invoices, supplier records, or information held by professional advisers.

Attempting to destroy financial documents rarely succeeds in permanently hiding assets, particularly where transactions have left an electronic trail.

What if evidence was destroyed before proceedings began?

The timing may affect how the court views the situation, but it does not necessarily excuse the conduct. If documents were destroyed before either party contemplated divorce, it may simply reflect ordinary record-keeping practices rather than any attempt to mislead.

However, if someone anticipated divorce or knew financial proceedings were likely and deliberately disposed of evidence to prevent it being used later, the court may draw different conclusions.

The surrounding circumstances will usually be important, and the court will consider matters such as why documents disappeared, whether there is a plausible explanation, and whether alternative evidence remains available.

What are the consequences of deliberately destroying evidence?

Family courts have broad powers to deal with parties who fail to comply with their disclosure obligations. If the court concludes that evidence has been deliberately destroyed or concealed, it may draw adverse inferences from that behaviour. In other words, the judge may assume that the missing evidence would have been unfavourable to the person responsible for its disappearance.

For example, if business accounts disappear shortly before disclosure, the court may be more willing to accept the other spouse’s argument that income has been understated or assets have been concealed. Equally, where bank statements are missing, the court may scrutinise other financial evidence more closely and question the credibility of the individual involved.

Credibility is often extremely important in financial remedy cases. A party who is found to have been dishonest about disclosure may find that much of their remaining evidence is viewed with considerable caution.

Could there be costs consequences if my ex has been found to have destroyed evidence?

Although the general rule in financial remedy proceedings is that each party pays their own legal costs, there are exceptions. If one spouse has behaved unreasonably during litigation, including by failing to provide proper disclosure or deliberately destroying evidence, the court may decide that they should contribute towards the other party’s legal costs.

This is by no means automatic, but litigation misconduct can influence costs decisions where the conduct has increased the expense or complexity of the proceedings. Destroying evidence often results in additional investigations, requests for third-party disclosure, expert involvement, and further court hearings, all of which increase costs for everyone involved.

What should you do if you suspect your ex has destroyed evidence?

Keep copies of any documents already in your possession and make a careful note of information you believe has gone missing. If you have previous versions of financial records, emails, or messages, preserve them securely.

Avoid attempting to access your former partner’s private accounts or devices without permission. Logging into someone else’s email, cloud storage, or mobile phone without permission can create significant legal difficulties and may expose you to civil or criminal consequences. Evidence obtained improperly may also cause complications within the proceedings. Instead, allow your solicitor to obtain evidence through the proper legal process where appropriate.

If you believe your former partner has deliberately destroyed relevant material, early legal advice is essential. Every case is different, and the best approach will depend on the nature of the missing evidence and the wider circumstances of your divorce.

The post What Happens If My Ex Destroys Evidence During Divorce? appeared first on Major Family Law.

For many people, the concept of joining another person to divorce proceedings sounds unusual. After all, divorce is a matter between two spouses. However, financial disputes are frequently more complicated than they first appear. Property may be owned jointly with parents, a family business may hold valuable assets, or someone else may claim ownership of money that one spouse says should be included in the matrimonial finances.

A joinder application allows the court to bring the relevant person or organisation into the proceedings so that their interests can be properly considered before any final decisions are made.

Without joinder, the court could make an order that unfairly affects someone who has never been given the chance to explain their position.

Why might a third party need to become involved?

There are many situations where someone outside the marriage has a genuine interest in the financial issues being resolved.

Perhaps the most common example involves property ownership. Imagine a married couple living in a house that is legally owned by one spouse and that spouse’s parents. During the divorce, the other spouse argues that the property forms part of the matrimonial assets because the parents’ names were only added for administrative reasons.

But what happens if the parents disagree and maintain that they own a genuine share of the property? The court cannot fairly determine ownership without hearing from the parents themselves. In these circumstances, joining them to the proceedings may be appropriate.

Similar issues arise where a family member claims to have lent substantial sums of money to one or both spouses.

One spouse may argue that the loan is genuine and should reduce the value of the matrimonial assets available for division. While the other may say that the alleged loan is simply a gift or has been invented to reduce the financial settlement.

If the lender wishes to recover the money, they may need to become a party so that the court can determine whether the debt is legally enforceable.

Who can be joined?

Many different individuals and organisations can potentially become parties to family proceedings.

These may include:

• Parents or other relatives
• Adult children in limited circumstances
• Business partners
• Companies
• Trustees
• Property co-owners
• Individuals claiming repayment of significant loans
• Anyone asserting a legal interest in assets under dispute

Each case depends entirely on its own facts, and the proposed party must have a genuine legal interest that could be affected by the court’s decision.

How does the court decide whether joinder is appropriate?

The family court will not permit joinder simply because one party believes someone should become involved. Instead, the judge carefully considers whether joining the third party is necessary to enable the court to resolve the issues fairly. Several factors are likely to be considered, including whether the:

• Proposed party has a real legal interest in the dispute
• Court can make an effective order without involving them
• Refusing the joinder risks injustice to either the existing parties or the proposed third party

The court also considers whether joining another party would unnecessarily complicate proceedings or increase costs without providing meaningful assistance. The overriding objective remains dealing with cases justly and proportionately.

What evidence supports a joinder application?

Applications should be supported by clear evidence; depending on the circumstances, this may include:

• Property title documents
• Land Registry records
• Loan agreements
• Bank statements showing financial transfers
• Company accounts
• Shareholder agreements
• Trust deeds
• Emails, letters, or text messages discussing ownership arrangements
• Witness statements explaining the background
• Mortgage documentation
• Contracts relating to business assets

The stronger the documentary evidence, the easier it is for the court to understand why another party’s involvement may be necessary.

If someone opposes a joinder application, they will need to provide evidence showing that the proposed third party has no genuine legal interest or that their involvement would add unnecessary complexity without assisting the court.

What happens after someone is joined?

Once the court joins the third party, they formally become part of the proceedings. This does not mean they become involved in every aspect of the divorce itself; rather, they participate in relation to the issues affecting their legal interests.

For example, parents joined because they claim ownership of part of a property will not generally become involved in discussions about child arrangements. Instead, their role focuses on the property dispute only.

The joined party will usually receive copies of relevant court documents and have the opportunity to file evidence explaining their position. They may attend hearings, instruct solicitors and, where appropriate, instruct barristers to represent them.

If the matter cannot be resolved, the court will hear evidence from all relevant parties before determining the disputed issue.

Can joinder make a case take longer?

Adding another party naturally introduces additional issues that require investigation. The joined party may need time to obtain legal advice, gather documents and prepare witness evidence. In addition, further disclosure may become necessary.

Further hearings may also be required to determine preliminary issues before the court can resolve the financial claims between the spouses. Although this can extend proceedings, a joinder order is sometimes essential.

Attempting to resolve ownership disputes without involving everyone affected may simply create further litigation after the divorce has concluded; resolving all relevant issues together is often more efficient in the long term.

What should you do if you believe someone else has an interest?

If you suspect that another individual or organisation has a legal interest in assets involved in your financial proceedings, it is important to raise the issue as early as possible. This is because delaying the matter can increase costs and add to the complexity of the case.

Your solicitor will usually consider questions such as:

• Who legally owns the asset?
• Does anyone else claim ownership?
• Has money been advanced as a loan or a gift?
• Are company or trust structures involved?
• Will the court’s decision affect another person’s legal rights?

Early investigation allows documents to be obtained while evidence remains available and memories remain fresh. Even if it ultimately proves unnecessary to make a joinder application, identifying potential issues early helps ensure the case proceeds efficiently.

If you believe that a third party may have an interest in assets involved in your divorce or financial remedy proceedings, obtaining specialist legal advice at an early stage can help identify the appropriate course of action and minimise unnecessary delay.

The post Joinder Applications Explained: A Guide For Family Law Clients appeared first on Major Family Law.

In financial remedy proceedings, both parties are under a strict duty of full and frank disclosure, and each party is required to complete a Form E, setting out their income, assets, liabilities, and financial resources. That includes all income, whether it is paid through the banking system or received in cash.

There is no distinction in principle between salary paid by bank transfer and income received in cash. If a party is receiving cash for work carried out, services provided, or goods sold, that income is still relevant and must be disclosed. The court is not limited to HMRC figures or accounting records; it can, and often does, look beyond them where there is reason to believe they do not reflect reality.

Why cash income arises, particularly in self-employment

Cash income is not automatically suspicious in itself, and there are many legitimate reasons an individual might receive payment in cash, especially in certain trades or professions. For example, self-employed tradespeople such as builders, electricians, plumbers, and decorators may be paid partly or wholly in cash for small jobs. Hospitality workers, market traders, hairdressers, cleaners, and personal trainers may also receive cash payments depending on their client base. In some cases, cash payments are simply a matter of convenience for customers or reflect long-standing informal arrangements.

However, the existence of cash income introduces complexity in divorce cases because it is inherently less transparent. Unlike salary paid through PAYE, cash transactions may not automatically appear in bank statements or be fully declared to HMRC. This creates scope for disagreement about what the true level of income actually is.

The court does not assume that all cash income is undeclared or illegitimate. Instead, it examines the evidence carefully and assesses credibility, consistency, and lifestyle.

How cash income can be evidenced in financial proceedings

If income is not properly recorded in tax returns or payslips, the court must rely on indirect evidence to build a picture of financial reality. Bank statements are often the starting point. Even if cash is received, it is frequently eventually paid into a bank account to meet household expenses, mortgage payments, or business costs. Regular cash deposits can therefore be a strong indicator of undeclared income, particularly where they correlate with spending patterns.

The court will also look at expenditure compared with declared income. If a party declares modest earnings but maintains an expensive lifestyle, such as frequent holidays, high-value purchases, or significant discretionary spending, this may suggest additional income sources.

In self-employed cases, invoices, receipts, till records, and accounting ledgers may be examined for inconsistencies. A forensic accountant may be instructed to analyse whether declared turnover aligns with expected business activity.

Other forms of evidence can include:

• Witness evidence from clients or customers who have paid in cash
• Text messages, emails, or social media communications referring to payments
• Evidence of materials purchased that do not align with declared output
• Surveillance or circumstantial evidence in high-conflict cases (used cautiously and rarely)

Importantly, the court is entitled to draw reasonable inferences where direct evidence is unavailable, and is not required to accept incomplete or implausible financial disclosure at face value.

How cash income affects maintenance and financial settlements

Cash income can significantly influence both spousal maintenance and child maintenance calculations.

For child maintenance, the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) generally relies on HMRC-reported income. However, where there is evidence that income is higher than declared, an application can be made for a variation on the grounds of unearned or diverted income or additional income not taken into account. If cash income is proven, it can increase the assessed maintenance payable.

In spousal maintenance cases, the court has broader discretion under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. It considers all available resources and income, whether declared or not. If the court is satisfied that a party has access to cash income, it can include that in its assessment of income available to meet needs.

In financial settlements more broadly, cash income may also affect capitalisation arguments. For example, if one party seeks a clean break, the court may assess whether ongoing income, including cash earnings, is sufficient to support independence.

The court may also credit income where it believes a party is deliberately suppressing or under-reporting earnings. This means the judge can attribute an income level based on evidence of earning capacity rather than relying on declared figures.

Consequences of failing to disclose cash income

Failure to disclose cash income is treated seriously by the family court. The duty of full and frank disclosure is fundamental to the fairness of proceedings, so if a party is found to have hidden income, several consequences may follow:

• Adverse inferences: This means the court may assume that the undisclosed income exists and is of a certain level, even if not precisely quantified. This can significantly increase maintenance obligations or reduce the undisclosed party’s share of assets.
• Costs consequences: The court may order the non-disclosing party to pay some or all of the other side’s legal costs, particularly if litigation has been prolonged or made more complex by dishonesty.
• Contempt of court: Failure to provide accurate disclosure in Form E or in sworn statements can amount to contempt, potentially leading to fines or imprisonment, although this is reserved for extreme cases.

In addition, a party who is found to have been dishonest about income is likely to lose credibility on all other financial issues. Judges are often influenced by overall reliability, and dishonesty in one area can affect the entire outcome.

In addition, tax consequences may arise separately if undeclared cash income has not been reported to HMRC. While this is not a matter for the family court to enforce directly, findings in family proceedings can sometimes be shared or become relevant in parallel investigations.

The post How To Count Cash Income As Part Of The Divorce Settlement? appeared first on Major Family Law.

There is no automatic rule that says an expected inheritance will either definitely be included or ignored. Instead, the court will look at the circumstances of each case and consider how realistic the inheritance is, how soon it is likely to be received, and whether it would affect the fairness of any financial settlement.

What is meant by an expected inheritance?

An expected inheritance refers to money, property, or assets that someone believes they are likely to receive in the future, although they do not yet own those assets. This could include:

• A parent who has made a will leaving substantial assets to an adult child
• A grandparent who has indicated that a particular property will pass to a family member
• A relative who is terminally ill and there is a known estate plan
• A person who is already a beneficiary under a trust that will take effect upon someone’s death

Unlike an inheritance that has already been received, an expected inheritance remains uncertain. Circumstances can change; wills can be rewritten; assets can diminish and relationships between family members may alter. For that reason, courts generally approach future inheritances with caution.

Is an expected inheritance taken into account during divorce?

The court’s primary objective when dealing with financial remedies following divorce is to achieve fairness. Judges have wide discretion and must consider all the circumstances of the case, including the financial resources that each party currently has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future.

An inheritance that has not yet been received does not automatically form part of the matrimonial assets available for division. However, if there is compelling evidence that the inheritance is imminent and highly likely, it may influence the outcome.

In some cases, the existence of an expected inheritance may reduce the amount one party receives from the matrimonial asset pot, while in others, it may have no effect whatsoever.

Are there definite circumstances where the answer is yes or no?

Generally speaking, if the inheritance is merely speculative, the court is unlikely to place much weight upon it. For example, suppose a husband expects eventually to inherit from his healthy, eighty-year-old mother. Although he may believe he will receive a substantial sum one day, nobody can predict when that might occur; his mother could live for many years and could change her will at any time. In those circumstances, the court is unlikely to regard the inheritance as a present financial resource.

By contrast, if a wife is due to inherit several million pounds within weeks because probate is almost complete following the death of her father, the court is much more likely to take that forthcoming inheritance into account. The closer and more certain the inheritance, the more relevant it becomes.

Does the size of the expected inheritance matter?

The value of the anticipated inheritance can influence the court’s approach. For example, suppose a person expects to inherit around £20,000. In the context of a divorce involving assets worth several million pounds, that sum may have little significance.

However, where one spouse is likely to receive £2 million and the couple’s existing assets amount to only £500,000, the court may consider that future wealth highly relevant.

A substantial inheritance could affect issues such as housing needs, maintenance, and the overall fairness of the settlement. That said, size alone is not enough, and a large inheritance that remains speculative may still carry little weight.

How likely must the inheritance be?

Judges are interested in probability rather than mere possibility; several factors may indicate that an inheritance is likely:

• The person from whom the inheritance is expected has already died
• Probate proceedings are underway
• There is a valid will naming the beneficiary
• Assets within the estate have been identified
• There are no obvious challenges to the will

Where a relative remains alive and healthy, the anticipated inheritance is much less certain. Even if family members have made promises over many years, there is no guarantee that those promises will ultimately be fulfilled.

What evidence might be needed?

A party who argues that an inheritance should be taken into account may need evidence to support that argument.

Relevant evidence could include:

• Copies of wills, probate documents, estate accounts, trust documentation and correspondence from solicitors handling the estate.
• Medical evidence where the expected inheritance depends upon the health of the person concerned, although courts are generally reluctant to engage in speculation about life expectancy.
• Witness statements and documentary evidence showing the value and certainty of the inheritance may also assist.

The court will carefully assess the quality of the evidence before deciding what weight should be attached to the anticipated assets.

Can an inheritance received shortly after divorce lead to the settlement being revisited?

Although financial orders are intended to provide finality, there are exceptional cases in which the court may revisit a settlement. If a significant and unforeseen event occurs shortly after the order has been made, an application may be possible. For example, in circumstances where a couple finalise their financial settlement and, just a few weeks later, one spouse unexpectedly inherits several million pounds because a relative dies. Depending upon the circumstances and the timing, the other party may seek to challenge the order.

These cases are rare and highly fact-specific. The courts place great importance upon certainty and finality; therefore not every inheritance received after divorce will justify reopening matters. However, where a dramatic change occurs soon after the order and undermines the fairness of the original settlement, the court may be prepared to intervene.

What about inheritances already received?

The position is different where the inheritance has already been received before the financial settlement is determined. Inherited assets are often regarded as non-matrimonial property because they originate from outside the marriage. Nevertheless, that does not mean they are automatically protected.

Where resources are limited and one party’s needs cannot otherwise be met, inherited wealth may become available to satisfy those needs. For example, if the family home and savings are insufficient to provide suitable accommodation for both spouses, inherited assets may be taken into account.

The post Is An Expected Inheritance Considered During Divorce Proceedings? appeared first on Major Family Law.