Phillip Blatchly has fire in his belly and works hard. He is very clever and is a very fluent court performer. He has good negotiation skills too. Phillip is very polished and has a wonderful bedside manner. He is organised, always impeccably prepared and is not afraid of giving client difficult advice.Chambers and Partners 2023 and Legal 500 2023
Phillip is consistently ranked as a leading matrimonial finance junior by both of the legal directories, Chambers and Partners and The Legal 500. He is described as being “exceptional”, “charming yet ferocious”, able to “change his line of attack very easily” whilst also “being willing to take a judge on”. He is said to have “a brain like a calculator” and is a “skilled advocate with an impressive technical grasp of the law”.
Phillip’s expertise lies in managing and resolving financial disputes when relationships end, whether through separation, divorce or death. He is regularly instructed in cases involving offshore assets, trusts, complicated company structures, hidden wealth and other atypical financial resources that demand special consideration and proficiency.
He has acted in many cases involving technical legal arguments, the outcome of which is decisive to the success or otherwise of the main proceedings. Recent examples include the extent to which a party should be held to a nuptial agreement, the effect of a party’s failure to comply with disclosure rules, and establishing / resisting claims by interveners to ownership of assets that would otherwise be subject to the court’s dispositive jurisdiction.
Phillip has appeared before the range of tribunals up to and including Court of Appeal level. Before the Court of Appeal, he has appeared both with and without a leader. Several of his cases are now the leading authorities on the points of law in issue. In addition, Phillip has experience in drafting successful grounds of objection to the Supreme Court.
He has a reputation as a powerful, effective advocate - “an extremely persuasive advocate” – (The Legal 500, 2018); in part, the product of invaluable experience in criminal law trial work in his early career.
- Financial remedies
- Cohabitation claims
- Inheritance Act claims
- Private law children matters, including financial provision
Gallagher v Gallagher (No 2) (Financial Remedies)  EWFC 53
Instructed as junior counsel in a case involving assets found to be worth c.£34.5m. The principal issues at play were familiar territory and included valuations of private companies (the parties’ respective experts were c.£34m apart on value); calculating non-matrimonial wealth and discounting (or not) for illiquidity. The main dispute turned on the value of a construction company, with sole experts giving evidence by ‘hot-tub’. The judgment includes some helpful dictum regarding the duties imposed on sole experts when engaging with their counterpart in proceedings.
Gallagher v Gallagher (No 1) (Reporting Restrictions)  EWFC 52
Following obtaining a full interim reporting restriction order (“RRO”), Mostyn J revised the terms to prohibit for a defined period of time the publication of material relating to the parties’ children and various confidential reports and advice relating to tax liabilities and other litigation.
Mostyn J confirmed that this judgment was his last word on the subject of publicity in financial remedy proceedings – henceforth, his Lordship’s default position will be to publish financial remedy judgement in full without anonymisation (which includes providing the press with copies of skeleton arguments when they are sought) and any derogation will need to be justified on the individual facts of that case.
XZ v YZ  EWFC 49
Instructed as junior counsel to obtain a reporting restriction order (“RRO”) ahead of the final hearing of the parties’ claim for financial remedies. This was the first reported decision where the applicant successfully obtained a RRO before Mostyn J notwithstanding his Lordship having made plain in three earlier decisions that, as a matter of default, financial remedy proceedings should be published in full, without anonymisation. Mostyn J made a full RRO on an interim basis to be reviewed at the conclusion of the final hearing.
Wodehouse -v- Wodehouse  EWCA Civ 3009
Appeared as sole counsel in the Court of Appeal, where Phillip represented the successful husband, who appealed against a lump sum order made directly against a discretionary trust, of which the husband was a potential beneficiary. The Court of Appeal found that the judge had no jurisdiction under section 23(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 to make an order against a third party trust.
Norman -v- Norman  EWCA Civ 120
Phillip represented the successful husband as junior counsel in the Court of Appeal. The court refused the wife’s appeal of the lower court’s refusal to set aside the terms a consent order. The case required a thorough analysis of the law on res judicata, issue and cause estoppel, the court’s powers under FPR r.4.1(6) now governed under FPR r.9.9A and fraudulent set aside following the Supreme Court’s decision in Sharland.
Norman -v- Norman  EWCA Civ 49
Appeared for the successful husband as junior counsel in the Court of Appeal, where the wife sought an anonymity order. The case provided clear authority on the procedure and exceptional circumstances required for the Court of Appeal to depart from its ordinary practice and grant an anonymity direction.
N -v- N  EWCA Civ 314
Phillip represented the successful husband as junior counsel in the Court of Appeal. The court overturned the lower court’s decision to set aside the terms of a consent order on the basis of the husband’s non-disclosure. The Court of Appeal opined (although did not determine) that the duty to give full and frank disclosure does not arise during the appellate process. This represented the first time any reported decision considered this issue.
Phillip regularly lectures in-house for solicitors and respected industry training providers like Resolution. He is a contributor to the family law enforcement section of uk.practicallaw.com.
Family Law Bar Association.
The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple
Phillip was an elected member of the Bar Council and the Young Bar Council between 2011-2014. He was co-opted onto the committee of the Family Law Bar Association for the same period.
Law LLB (Hons), University of Surrey
"Has a good eye for detail and presents relevant arguments in a methodical, persuasive style." "He's personable and willing to go above and beyond for his clients." "He's efficient and always makes himself available."
Chambers and Partners, 2022
"Accessible, well prepared and good with many different types of clients. He gives pragmatic advice in a way that clients get, and has an excellent recall of detail which impresses." "Incredibly sharp and perceptive, he inspires confidence in all those around him.”
Chambers and Partners, 2020
Phillip is exceptional. A ferocious but considerate barrister, who is really gifted in terms of his advocacy, and someone who endears himself to judges and clients alike. He is a skilled advocate and has an impressive technical grasp of the law”
Chambers and Partners, 2019
“He’s very good at reading the situation and the judge, and can change his line of attack very easily. On his feet he’s very erudite and very persuasive. Philip gives very good advice in conference and cut through issues easily”
Chambers and Partners, 2018
“A very good advocate who is excellent at explaining legal points in a comprehensive way and is willing to take a judge on”
Chambers and Partners, 2017
“He has a brain like a calculator. He's extremely well prepared, experienced beyond his years and very persuasive in court. He’s a fantastic negotiator, who manages the client’s expectations well. He is so nice and gently persuasive that you have no idea you are coming round to his way of thinking”
Chambers and Partners, 2016
‘Extremely hardworking, super thorough, sensible and excellent with clients, because his dedication is clear to them, and to the solicitors who instruct him.’
Legal 500, 2022
"A charming yet ferocious advocate – he quickly and easily charms his client, opponent and judge with his emotional intelligence and wit”
Legal 500, 2019
"“An extremely persuasive advocate”
Legal 500, 2018
“He is a solid performer – clients really feel that he fights their corner”
Legal 500, 2017
“He has an excellent manner with clients, provides pragmatic and robust advice and is meticulous in his presentation”
Legal 500, 2016
Phillip lives in London. He enjoys travelling, cooking and most sports, especially skiing, boxing and golf. He is in the (long) process of learning Arabic; a humbling endeavour.