Clients need to understand the implications of poor conduct on costs in financial remedy proceedings, as Matthew Taylor explains
One of the most pronounced misconceptions for clients embarking on financial remedy proceedings surrounds the raising of conduct.
All practitioners will be familiar with having to break the bad news to a client that while their spouse may have behaved poorly during the marriage, behaviour is unlikely to amount to that which would “be inequitable to disregard”, in the immortal words of section 25(2)(g) of the Matrimonial Causes Act (MCA) 1973.
This article seeks to set out the current position with regards to conduct; the threshold for a successful conduct argument; and the interplay between conduct and the costs rules – drawing on the recent judgment of Mostyn J in OG v AG  EWFC 52.
The case conc...
Continue Reading for less than 70p per day!
This article is part of our subscription-based access. Please pick one of the options below to continue.
Already registered? Login to access premium content