It's been a funny old week. Not so amusing, perhaps, for the members of Renaissance Chambers, who find themselves the latest victims of the legal aid cuts, but there have been other things happening of note (or maybe not).
For example, a story has been floating around in the gutter press over the last couple of days about some spat between two 'top' divorce lawyers. I would tell you all about it, but I lost the will to live before I got to the end of this article in the Daily Fail. If you are sad enough (a) to be interested in such things and (b) to read the Daily Fail, then head over there for all the exciting details (remarkably, the story has also appeared in a certain more 'reputable' publication, but that is behind a paywall, so I won't provide the link).
Moving swiftly on, the big news of the week was of course the publication of the Law Commission's eagerly-awaited report upon Matrimonial Property, Needs and Agreements. For the details see my post below, and if your attention span can't last that long, here is the best summary I came across on Twitter:
Condensed read: 1. Pre-nups should be binding but not in respect of needs 2. As to needs, err... can we get back to you? #LawCommissionAs for my views on the report, I wasn't that impressed. As the above tweet suggests, the only real recommendation for a change in the law relates to pre-nups. However, I have never been particularly interested in pre-nups myself. In fact, my advice for anyone whose betrothed asks for a pre-nup is to call the wedding off, as they obviously care more for their money than for you. Whatever happened to 'what's mine is yours' and all that?
— Alexander Chandler (@familybrief) February 27, 2014
I shall end with another piece of advice. If, like me, you're constantly fascinated by all of those wonderful news stories informing us of what is or isn't good for relationships, you will no doubt find this of interest (thanks, David): Secret of successful relationship is getting pissed together.
Have a good weekend.