Reported Cases
We make every effort to settle cases but if litigation is necessary we are very expert in it.
Hughes Fowler Carruthers remains a firm of choice for the huge money cases The Legal 500 2020
(1) Robert Tchenguiz (2) Vincent Tchenguiz (3) Tim McClean (4) Nouri Obayda (5) Sarosh Zaiwalla v Vivian Imerman : Vivian Saul Imerman v Elizabeth Tchenguiz Imerman [2010] EWCA Civ 908
Acted for the husband (Appellant) in an interlocutory appeal and cross-appeal in ancillary relief proceedings which raised fundamentally important questions in relation to the Hildebrand rules and addressed whether the wife should deliver obtained files to the husband’s solicitors (and retain no copies) and that the wife and her solicitors be restrained, at least for the time being, from using any information they might have gained from reading the files.
MacLeod v MacLeod [2008] UKPC 64; [2009] 3 WLR 437
The firm acted in an appeal by a husband from the Manx courts to the Privy Council against a judge’s decision to exercise his discretion to alter a post nuptial agreement. Appeal allowed.
Bokor-Ingram v Bokor-Ingram [2009] EWCA Civ 412; [2009] 2 FLR 922
The firm acted for the wife (Appellant) in ancillary relief proceedings arising from a refusal of permission to appeal where the wife was seeking to set aside a consent order because of the husband’s non-disclosure.
Iqbal Mubarik v the United Kingdom [2009] ECHR 1437
The firm represented the husband (Applicant) in The European Court of Human Rights in a complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the Hadkinson order prevented him from defending the court proceedings brought against him unless he complied with the conditions stipulated by the court and thus restricted his right of access to court and his right to equality of arms. Furthermore, compliance with the order restricted his right of access to courts in Jersey, where proceedings relating to the trust could be heard.
Marano v Marano [2009] EWCA Civ 967
The firm acted for the wife (Appellant) in an application for permission to appeal a lump sum order in the husband’s favour where the value of his property investments had plummeted.
Elizabeth Tchenguiz Imerman v Vivian Saul Imerman [2009] EWHC 3486 (Fam)
Advised the husband (Respondent) in a case concerning applications in ancillary relief proceedings arising from potential use and retention of irregularly obtained, confidential information.
I v I [2008] EWHC 1167 (Fam)
The firm represented the wife (Applicant) in an application to set aside an ancillary relief order on the basis on non-disclosure by the husband.
Alexandra Ella v Yuval Ella & Ors [2008] EWHC 3258 (Ch)
Acted for the husband (Defendant) in an application to annul a bankruptcy order so as to free up progress of ancillary relief proceedings.
AB v JLB [2008] EWHC 2965 (Fam)
The firm acted for the mother (Applicant) in a judgment in proceedings under Brussels II bis where father was seeking dismissal of English proceedings initiated by the mother.
Mubarak v Mubarik [2008] JRC 136 [2009] 1 FLR 664
The firm acted for the husband (Respondent) in a case, described as the longest running and most bitterly fought divorce case in England, involving an application by the wife requiring the Court to consider the circumstances in which it can enforce or give effect to an order of the English Family Division relating to a Jersey trust.
Mubarak v Mubarik [2007] EWHC 220 (Fam)
The firm acted for the husband (Respondent) in an ancillary relief application following a very lengthy and costly litigation to enforce the court order awarding the wife a lump sum of £4,875,000. The wife applied, as alternatives: (i) to set aside, under Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s 37, the husband’s transfer of shares into the husband’s Jersey trust; (ii) to set aside, also under s 37, the wife’s exclusion from the trust; (iii) to vary the terms of the trust, as a post-nuptial settlement, under s 24(1)(c), so as to require the trustees to pay the wife an amount equal to the amounts now owed by the husband to the wife; and (iv) to correct the judge’s original order under the slip rule.
L v (1) L (2) H (a firm) [2007] EWHC 140 (QB)
The firm acted for the wife and the wife’s solicitors (Defendants) in an application by husband requesting that the wife’s solicitors hand over copies of his hard drive which had been copied during the course of divorce proceedings.
