Amy Hadley

Amy’s expertise covers:

• Domestic Abuse
• Divorce
• Cohabitation Agreements
• Civil Partnership Dissolution
• Children Act (application for parents)
• Children Act (application for grandparents)
• Separation Agreements
• Mediation
• International Divorce
• Fixed Fee Family Services
• Finances Post Divorce

Notable Family cases

Successfully Defending Pension Variation Claim Amid Financial Abuse

Amy was instructed by A in highly acrimonious contested proceedings where there was a longstanding history of financial abuse. A’s ex-husband B had attempted to vary an agreement reached at the FDR on the grounds that there had been a significant change of circumstances in the period between the order being made and a pension share being implemented. B’s position related to the increase in the value of his pension due to an ill-health enhancement received on his retirement ahead of the FDR. B’s claim had been robustly defended by A and at a Mention hearing the Judge not only found in favour of A, directing the pension share to include the ill-health enhancement but awarded A her costs in defending those proceedings.

Securing Pension Share Against Non-Compliant and Asset-Hiding Ex-Spouse

Amy acted for C who had been forced to commerce Court proceedings as a result of her ex-husband, D’s failure to engage in discussions and subsequently his non-compliance with the Court’s directions. Following successful applications for specific disclosure of pension assets and then freezing orders to halt the drawdown of the same, C was awarded a pension sharing order in her favour in excess of £200,000 plus her costs in defending those proceedings.

Securing Family Home for Children Amid Property and Childcare Disputes

Amy assisted on a matter on behalf of E who had issued proceedings under Schedule 1 of the Children Act in order to secure accommodation for the children of the family until the youngest reached 18 years of age. Her former partner, F made a cross-application under TOLATA for an order that they receive their interest in the property immediately, in addition to bringing Section 8 of the Children Act proceedings seeking an order for the children to live with him, citing numerous safeguarding issues. After the childcare arrangements were resolved in favour of E, both the applications under Schedule 1 and TOLATA were combined and the Court found in favour of E ordering that the family home should be preserved for the benefit of the children, with a charge over the property in favour of F to be redeemed once the youngest child attained the age of 18 or finished secondary education, whichever was the later.