Practice Profile

Camilla specialises in divorce, relationship/cohabitational breakdown, financial remedy upon the same and private children law matters. She has lectured family law for 18 years and is very much an academic in her approach to the practice of family law; this method has brought much success for her clients resulting in settlements which achieve the desired fairness and equality. Her aim in creating this practice as The Women’s Lawyer was to bring an equality of arms to cases where without legal advice and guidance there would be none.

Within the consultancy I assist with the drafting of applications and preparation of documents such as position statements. I can assist with bundle compilation, form filling, details of court fees and remission of the same where appropriate etc. I also research and provide the litigant with precedents and legal arguments such that they are fully aware of their rights and obligations within the remit of law I am giving said advice. I prepare what might be best called opinions, within said opinion I will give a detailed analysis of their situation, the rights they may have if any, a solution(s) to their problem(s) and how the law which will assist them with the same, this may also take the form of submissions and/or skeleton arguments. The initial email I send to the potential client (who remains a litigant in person throughout), post my initially meeting with her, is a comprehensive source of information and indeed reference, rather than advice, in some cases this is sufficient for their case as they may be requiring said knowledge or it may be that they instruct me to carry out an actual advice, either on a paid basis or within the pro bono surgery I run fortnightly at Tesco.

Case examples of her work are as follows:

  • APPLICATION FOR FINANCIAL RELIEF AFTER AN OVERSEAS DIVORCE UNDER SECTIONS 12 & 13 OF THE MATRIMONIAL AND FAMILY PROCEEDINGS ACT (MFPA) 1984. Application heard in the Central Family Court, Royal Courts of Justice, Holborn, before the Honourable Sir Justice Mostyn. Application successful, property adjustment order obtained
  • DIVORCE, BANKRUPTCY: ANCILLARY RELIEF, LEGAL AND BENEFICIAL INTEREST ISSUES. Beneficial interest bought from Trustee in Bankruptcy, Property adjustment order sought and gained as well as an Order for Deemed Service post repeated non acknowledgement of the divorce petition. Application heard in the Family Court sitting in Watford before District Judges Carr and Chesterfield
  • N1 CLAIM, DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM UNDER TOLATA 1996, JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT OVERTURNED BY A D11 APPLICATION NOTICE, CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST AND RESULTING TRUST ARGUMENT WHICH LED TO SCHEDULE 1 CA 1989 CLAIM. Settlement reached via roundtable meeting with respondents’ solicitors with clients’ debts paid under SCHEDULE 1
  • DIVORCE, FINANCIAL HEARINGS: FDA, FDR, FINAL HEARING INVOLVING SEVERAL POINTS ON MATRIMONIAL AND NON MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY & CHILDREN ACT PROCEEDINGS: FHDRA/DIRECTIONS AND FINAL HEARINGS. Both Final Hearings included assistance with extensive preparation of bundles, cross examination questions, position statements, compliance with previous orders made at FDR/DIRECTIONS including CLAIMING COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS, heard in the Family Courts sitting in Watford and Hertford, Deputy District Judges Orchover and Tansey, District Judges Sethi, Carr and Chesterfield. Financial case successful, based on needs argument as per s25 MCA 1973 and JL v SL 2015 EWHC 360 (Fam)
  • APPLICATION FOR A s55 (1) (e) FAMILY LAW ACT (FLA) 1986 SUCH THAT THE DIVORCE OBTAINED ABROAD SHOULD NOT BE RECOGNISED HERE IN THE UK. Application successful, granted by His Honour Judge Wilding, in the Family Court sitting in Watford. FINANCIAL APPLICATION MADE post obtainment of DECREE NISI UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF ENGLAND & WALES: FDA, FDR, repeated FDR in light of non disclosure and respondent’s argument of no funds available in the marital pot as per KC v RC & Anor [2015] EWFC B216 (24 November 2015) in the Family Court sitting in St Albans County Court – PENDING
  • APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION (LEAVE) TO REMOVE A CHILD FROM THE JURISDICTION, under the CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ACT 2014 (CFA 2014), PROHIBITED STEPS ORDER AND SPECIFIC ISSUE APPLIED FOR IN the Family Court sitting in Watford – PENDING
  • APPLICATION FOR THE ORIGINAL CONSENT ORDER TO BE SET ASIDE ON THE GROUNDS OF MATERIAL NON DISCLOSURE: UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS, APPLICATION MADE UNDER MFPA 1984: Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 s 31F(6) Settlement reached via roundtable meeting with respondents’ solicitors
  • APPLICATION TO APPEAL CONSENT ORDER BASED ON UNDUE INFLUENCE & LACK OF LEGAL ADVICE IN LIGHT OF LEGAL AID CUTS: Precedents relied upon: Azizi v Aghaty [2016] EWHC 110 (Fam) and AB v CD [2016] EWHC 10 (Fam) In the Family Court sitting in Uxbridge – PENDING
  • APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SERVICE OF DIVORCE PAPERS OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION – SERVICE IN A HAGUE CONVENTION COUNTRY OUTSIDE EU, in the Divorce Centre, Bury St Edmunds – PENDING
  • OCCUPATION ORDER SOUGHT FOR COHABITANT UNDER S36 FLA 1996, TOLATA AND SCHEDULE 1 APPLICATION, FACT FINDING HEARING, SCOTT SCHEDULE PREPARED, LITIGATION FUNDING APPLICATION MADE UNDER ALSO UNDER SCHEDULE 1 & CF v KM (Financial Provision for child: costs of legal proceedings) [2011] 1 FLR 208, heard in the Family Court sitting in Watford, District Judges Sethi & Tansey. Permanent OCCUPATION ORDER obtained on FMH (usual triggering events), CAO concluded with highlighting the role of CAFCASS as in D v E and T [2016] EWFC 3, further cases referred to in light of recording of the mother: Re C (A Child) [2015] EWCA Civ 1096. SCHEDULE 1 1989 Application with clients’ debts cleared successfully with request made to the court to address extraction of said monies by way of renumeration, dividends and loans available to the Respondent by virtue of s455 CTA 2010 as a benefit in kind; 4 day final hearing, submissions allowed in writing by His Honour Judge Peter Wright QC in the Family Court sitting in Watford; so as to avoid advocacy related issues (given that I attend court as an Advisor as opposed to Advocate)
  • NON MOLESTATION ORDER/OCCUPATION ORDER, JUDICIAL SEPARATION, C100 APPLICATION AND C2 APPLICATION:RELOCATION OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION. Relied upon Re A (A child) (Supervised contact order: assessment of impact of domestic violence) [2015] EWCA Civ 486, [2015] All ER (D) 198 (May). Court requested to make full and proper consider ation to each of the relevant factors necessary for the risk assessment required by Section 1 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) and the Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2010/2955, PD 12J (FPR 2010) in light of the DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN RELATION TO CONTACT. Court further requested in light of Q v Q 2015 and in light of client being a litigant in person, if the learned Judge could (as per Sir James Munby P, suggested that 31G (6) of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (into force in April 2014) may provide the answer to this problem), by asking the questions of the Applicant on her behalf. Scott Schedule prepared, Fact Finding Hearing before DISTRICT JUDGE CARR, Family Court sitting at Watford, Directions Hearing re Relocation, Final Hearing re C100 – PENDING
  • APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR APPEAL, SET ASIDE, VARIATION OR SET ASIDE of a Consent Order on the grounds of a Barder event combined with issues surmounting to non disclosure, s31F MFPA 1984 AND Critchell v Critchell [2015] EWCA Civ 436 (30 April 2015) relied upon as precedent under the jurisdiction in Barder v Barder (Caluori Intervening) [1988] AC 20, [1987] 2 FLR 480 where a Consent Order was said to have been invalidated by subsequent events, as was the case here, application made in the Central Family Court, Holborn – PENDING