The duty of disclosure in financial proceedings

Published by a ��Ƶ Family expert

Practice notes

The duty of disclosure in financial proceedings

Published by a ��Ƶ Family expert

Practice notes

This Practice Note provides guidance on the ongoing duty of Full and frank disclosure in financial proceedings, together with the possible consequences of any breach of duty, including the court drawing adverse inferences. It also considers the Supreme Court decisions in Sharland v Sharland and Gohil v Gohil, together with the professional duty not to knowingly mislead the court by providing incorrect or inaccurate information in relation to Disclosure and the disclosure of documents to and by third parties.

General principles

There is an ongoing duty to provide full, frank, and clear, disclosure in financial proceedings. Such disclosure includes all material facts, documents and other information relevant to the issues in the case, together with any material changes after initial disclosure has been given. Such changes must be disclosed to the court and the other party at the earliest possible opportunity. As noted by Roberts J in AB v CD, ‘it is not for a litigant to judge the ambit of the duty to disclose or the consequences of disclosure; any information which is

Jurisdiction(s):

United Kingdom

Key definition:

Duty of disclosure definition

What does Duty of disclosure mean?

When completing a proposal form for a protection product, the applicant has a duty to disclose all facts relevant to the application, particularly in relation to health. Failure to do so can allow the life company to refuse to admit a claim and cancel the policy from inception on the grounds of non-disclosure.

��Ƶ