Divorcing couples often assume it would automatically be “fair” for their assets (such as their house, pensions, savings etc) to be split equally between them.  However, this is not necessarily the way the family courts see it, a point which was reiterated in the recent case of B v B which came before the Court of Appeal in March 2008.

Few people can have escaped the recent press coverage of this dramatic court case.  For much of that litigation and, importantly, for the final hearing Heather Mills acted in person (i.e. she did not have a solicitor or a barrister representing her). 

Although inevitably the McCartney v Mills case has generated almost unprecedented media interest, there is in fact nothing particularly surprising about it in legal terms.

Last summer it seemed that there was every chance of cohabiting couples gaining similar rights to married couples under landmark proposals from the Law Commission.  However, it now seems this movement has stalled.

The McCartney/Mills decision is eagerly awaited. Mr Justice Bennett is due to hand down his judgment on 17 March and will decide whether to make it public in whole, in part, or not at all.