Miller v Miller (Short Marriage: Clean break)

Core Citations

---

CONSIDERS

• Minton v Minton
• Wachtel v Wachtel
• A v A (Maintenance Pending Suit) (No 2)

[See more]

• Piglowski v Piglowski
• Rye v Rye
• Hedges v Hedges
• Cowan v Cowan
• Pearce v Pearce
• H v H (Financial Provision: Short Marriage)

REFERS TO

• Campbell v Campbell
• Gojkovic v Gojkovic (No. 2)
• White v White

[See more]

• Minton v Minton
• Boylan v Boylan
• Trippas v Trippas
• De Lasala v De Lasala
• A v A (Maintenance Pending Suit: Payment of Legal Fees)
• G v G (Financial Provision: Equal Division)
• N v N (Financial Provision: Sale of Company)
• Wachtel v Wachtel
• Lambert v Lambert
• O'Brien v O'Brien
• Cornick v Cornick (No 2)
• S v S
• Cordle v Cordle
• Attar v Attar (No. 2)
• Robertson v Robertson
• Martin v Martin
• G v G (Maintenance Pending Suit: Legal Costs)
• Cornick v Cornick (No 3)
• Doherty v Doherty

RESUELVE RECURSO

• Miller v Miller (Short Marriage: Clean break)

CITES

• Biogen Inc. v Medeva Plc
• G v G (Financial Provision: Separation agreement)
• Brett v Brett

CONSIDERS

• White v White
• G v G (Financial Provision: Separation Agreement)
• Foster v Foster [2003]

[See more]

• Divorce Reform Act 1969
• Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act 1970 - Articles : S-5
• Access to Justice Act 1999 - Articles : S-55
• Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 - Articles : S-25
• Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
• Family Law Act 1996
• Matrimonial Causes Act 1866
• Married Women's Property Act 1882
• Matrimonial Causes Act 1965
• Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act 1970
• Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 - Articles : S-25A
• Divorce Reform Act 1969
• Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 - Articles : S-23
• Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984

DISTINGUISHES

• Pearce v Pearce

CONSIDERED in

• Helen Lucille Ashton v Charles Errington Graham Ashton
• Lyustiger v Lyustiger
• Jindong Adams v John Cyril Adams

[See more]

• Blades v Phillips
• SP v LP
• Miller v Miller (Short Marriage: Clean break)
• Dora Scatliffe Petitioner v Irvine Fletcher Scatliffe Respondent
• Tameeka Corion v Arthur Corion
• Emma Mary Jane Villiers v Charles Alastair Hyde Villiers
• C.D v P.D
• Moses-Taiga v Taiga
• Tameeka Corion v Arthur Corion
• Peter Nicholas Lawrence v Donald James Gallagher
• H v W
• Charman v Charman (No 2)
• Patrick Mckillen (Petitioner) v Misland (Cyprus) Investments Ltd (a Company Registered in Cyprus) and Others
• M.T. v P.T.
• Miller v Miller (Short Marriage: Clean break)

CITED in

• Charman v Charman (No 2)
• Semperton & Semperton
• Q and Q

[See more]

• SS v NS

REPORTED OPINION OF in

• 07/07/2004 Daily Cases
• [2005] FAM 171
• [2004] 3 All ER 921

[See more]

• [2004] 3 WLR 1480
• [09/07/2004] TLR 1
• [2004] 2 FLR 893

REFERRED in

• Beverley Anne Charman (Petitioner) v John Robert Charman
• Jenifer Eileen Evans v Mark Stephen Evans
• Sorrell v Sorrell

[See more]

• Cunliffe v Fielden and Others
• B v B (Assessment of Assets: Pre-Marital Property)
• Kim Waggott v William H Waggott

FOLLOWED in

• Dora Scatliffe v Irvine Fletcher Scatliffe [Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court]
• Wight v Wight
• Lilleyman v Lilleyman and another

APPEAL RESOLVED in

• Miller v Miller (Short Marriage: Clean break)

This document cites

---

• Gojkovic v Gojkovic (No. 2)
• Cowan v Cowan
• Cornick v Cornick (No 2)
• Biogen Inc. v Medeva Plc
• G v G (Financial Provision: Separation Agreement)



See all quotations

• White v White
• Martin v Martin
• Piglowski v Piglowski
• S v S
• Pearce v Pearce
• White v White
• Cordle v Cordle
• Doherty v Doherty
• Wachtel v Wachtel
• Trippas v Trippas
• Minton v Minton
• Brett v Brett
• Hedges v Hedges
• Pearce v Pearce
• Lambert v Lambert
• G v G (Financial Provision: Separation agreement)
• Minton v Minton
• Wachtel v Wachtel
• H v H (Financial Provision: Short Marriage)
• Attar v Attar (No. 2)
• G v G (Financial Provision: Equal Division)
• Rye v Rye
• G v G (Maintenance Pending Suit: Legal Costs)
• N v N (Financial Provision: Sale of Company)
• Cornick v Cornick (No 3)
• O'Brien v O'Brien
• Boylan v Boylan
• A v A (Maintenance Pending Suit: Payment of Legal Fees)
• Campbell v Campbell
• Robertson v Robertson