1 Hare Court is pleased to share that Geoffrey Kingscote KC has co-authored an article published in the Summer edition of the Financial Remedies Journal.
Titled ‘50 Years on from Martin v Martin 1976 – Are Add-backs Fit for Purpose?’, the article has been written jointly with Claire Blakemore of Withers and Anita Mehta of 4PB, and explores the development of the law relating to add-backs in financial remedy proceedings over the past five decades.
The article marks the 50th anniversary of the landmark Court of Appeal decision in Martin v Martin [1976] Fam 335, a case which first articulated the principle that a party should not be permitted to dissipate matrimonial assets and then seek to benefit from the reduced asset pool when financial remedies are determined.
Drawing on case law spanning 50 years, Geoffrey, Claire and Anita examine how the treatment of add-backs has changed and question whether the current legal framework continues to produce fair and practical outcomes. The article considers the increasingly high threshold that has developed recently, the relationship between add-backs and conduct arguments, and whether the modern approach has moved too far from the pragmatic principles that originally underpinned the doctrine.
The authors state that while financial remedies jurisprudence has evolved significantly since 1976, particularly following White v White and Miller/McFarlane, there remains an important debate about whether the current approach to add-backs strikes the right balance between fairness, proportionality and access to justice.
The publication reflects Geoffrey’s longstanding involvement in complex financial remedies work and his continued contribution to discussion within the family law arena.
The full article can be found on the Financial Remedies Journal website.
