Kiren is a Senior Associate and a member of our Family Law Department. Kiren qualified as a Solicitor in 2010.
Acted for wife in financial remedy proceedings. The husband’s friend and brother intervened in the proceedings asserting interests in the matrimonial assets. At a preliminary issues hearing the court found that all were to be set aside save for the brother’s interest in the business. At final hearing the court found that the husband was unable to provide a credible explanation for what had happened to the proceeds of sale from a former matrimonial asset and added this back into the matrimonial pot justifying a departure from equality. Due to the wife’s vulnerability and limited earning capacity a joint lives order was also granted.
Acted for wife in financial remedy proceedings where the primary issue was one of post-separation contributions. For six years the husband had not made any contributions to the children’s school fees, which the wife was reimbursed for on top of a 50/50 division of matrimonial assets.
Acted for fourth and fifth intervenors, parents of the husband, in relation to a freezing order and a final hearing where the wife sought to set aside a transaction undervalue and further dissipated assets. The husband failed to comply with the final order in the financial remedy proceedings which resulted in two separate enforcement applications and one committal application where the husband was committed to prison for nine months for dissipating the matrimonial assets without the wife’s knowledge. The court urged the parties to settle by consent given the length of the proceedings and significant costs implications.
Acted for mother in TLATA and Schedule 1 CA 1989 proceedings. The case involved a mother being forced to issue proceedings as the father would not agree to buy her interest in a jointly owned property. The mother relied on the principles outlined in Bagum v Hafiz  EWCA Civ 801 for a preferential right to buy the entire property before it was placed on the open market. The mother was successful at final hearing and also obtained a significant costs order against the father. The father subsequently sought permission to appeal which was dismissed.
Acted for a civil partner in child arrangements and contested Family Law Act proceedings, where the mother was awarded a child arrangements “live with” order in relation to all three children, including the child that was not biologically hers. The court agreed that she was clearly a “psychological parent” (Re D ) and that it was important in keeping the three children together.
Acted for mother in her application to relocate with her children to Jerusalem. This case involved international legal considerations surrounding security and the instruction of foreign experts.