In a pivotal case in the High Court, President of the Family Division Sir James Munby has brought to light widespread administrative 'anomalies' in licensed fertility clinics.
The case, In the matter of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Cases A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H), was brought after audits by the Human Fertilisation and... Read More
How should we view the current inequality between survivors' benefits in same-sex civil partnerships, and in heterosexual marriages? Is the former a justified exception to equality on the basis of cost, or 'an unconscionable injustice, which is almost impossible to square with the Government’s stated commitment to fairness and... Read More
Two family judges, Mr Justice Holman and Mr Justice Mostyn, have reportedly locked horns over the issue of openness in the family courts.
Mr Justice Holman is all for opening up the family courts to public scrutiny while Mr Justice Mostyn asserts that family law constitutes “quintessentially private business”.
Mostyn has been at the mercy of... Read More
The recent landmark ruling in Re A and B is another step in the right direction for surrogacy law. The case is important because it shows the English court becoming more lenient and more pragmatic in relation to the rigid statutory six-month limit commissioning parents have to apply for legal parenthood (a parental order) once their... Read More
As Dr Amanda Foreman has been showing in her BBC series, The Ascent of Woman, not all societies have been patriarchal - or certainly not as patriarchal as British society in the last few centuries. When it comes to marital contracts, especially prenuptial agreements, the women of Ancient Egypt were a step ahead of our times. A collection... Read More
A judge in Chattanooga, Tennessee has used the recent Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) judgment in the case of Obergefell v Hodges – more commonly known as the gay marriage ruling – as a reason to refuse a heterosexual couple a divorce. Hamilton County Chancellor Jeffrey Atherton has taken a stand against the judgment... Read More
Overbearing in-laws are well-documented, but a recent case in New York takes the proverbial cake. Grandparents Hershel and Ophira Gottlieb of Edison, New Jersey, found themselves on the wrong side of Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Ellen Gesmer after apparently dragging out their son’s divorce proceedings in order to influence custody... Read More
Vardags Limited is a limited company trading as Vardags, Company No 7199468, registered in England and Wales, having its registered office at 10 Old Bailey, London EC4M 7NG. Vardags is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA Number 535955). Its VAT number is 99 001 7230.
Vardags uses the term ‘Partner’ as a professional title only, to describe a Senior Solicitor, Employee or Consultant with relevant experience, expertise and qualifications (whether legally qualified or otherwise) to merit the title. Our Partners are not partners in the legal sense. They are not liable for the debts, liabilities or obligations of Vardags Limited. Similarly, the term ’Director’ is a professional title only, to describe a non-legally qualified employee or consultant of Vardags with relevant experience, expertise and qualifications to merit the title. It does not necessarily imply that the relevant individual is a director of Vardags Limited.
A list of the directors of Vardags Limited and a list of the names of those using the title of ’Director’ and ’Partner’ together with their official status is available for inspection at Vardags’ registered office.