MK Family Law

The UK Supreme Court heard oral argument in January 2021 in the case of G. v. G .   The minor child's parents lived near one another in South Africa until February 2020. The minor child identified as lesbian, and the child's mother claims that she began experiencing persecution in South Africa on this basis.  The mother removed the minor child and took her to England, where she made an application for asylum.  The child's father brought a return petition under the Hague Abduction Convention.  The child's return was ordered.  The mother appealed to the UK Supreme Court asking:  1. Does a child named as a dependent on a parent's asylum application have any protection from refoulment? 2. Can a return order be made under the 1980 Hague Convention even where a child has protection from refoulment? 3. Should the High Court be slow to stay an application under the 1980 Convention prior to determination of an application for asylum? On March 19, 2021, the Supr...

Mr. Choupak filed a suit for conversion and unjust enrichment against his ex-Wife in their former state of residence, New York. On April 23, 2020, the Supreme Court of the State of New York dismissed his claims.  ( Choupak v. Koroleva, 2020 NY Slip Op 31443(U) (NY Sup Ct 2020) ) Mr. Choupak and Ms. Koroleva moved from New York to London in 2010.  Shortly thereafter, due to certain unreported foreign bank accounts and wages from Ms. Koroleva, the parties learned they owed back taxes, so they entered into an arrangement with the Internal Revenue Service for payment.  Then, in 2012, Ms. Koroleva filed for divorce in the Family Court in London, with the parties entering into a Separation Agreement on February 22, 2013. The separation agreement was converted into a financial remedy order on March 4, 2015 by the Family Court.  Just over one year later, in May 2016, the IRS determined the couple had overpaid their back-taxes for 2010 and 2011, and issued a joint check ...

From Guest Blogger, James Netto of Dawson Cornwell  in London Abduction in times of corona Much to the ire of certain abducting parents, it is still business (almost) as usual for the High Court of Justice in London. Although the UK is on lockdown preventing people from leaving home bar in very specific circumstances, our courts have been obliged to adapt exceptionally rapidly. Family lawyers are in totally new territory: for a steadfastly cautious profession known more for its wigs and gowns rather for than for its working of Google Hangouts, the last month has been a very, very steep learning curve. With detailed and radical guidance emanating from our highest judges and professional organisations effectively overnight, the profession is gradually getting used to hearings occurring remotely – either by telephone, or by webcam. So how is it going so far? Although it has not been without some bumps in the road, the higher courts are functioning with relative ease. Judge...