Call: 2009
Stuart is (or likes to think he is) a successful long-distance runner; he has completed several marathons and countless half marathons all over Europe.
When Stuart is not running (or in Court), he and his wife spend most of their spare time travelling and exploring with their young daughter; they can often be found somewhere between Canterbury and Whitstable on the “Crab and Winkle way”.
French (Fluent)
Instructing Stuart Snow
If you require help or advice please contact our clerking team.
Call +44 (0)20 7353 0711 or email clerks@pumpcourtchambers.com.
Stuart’s practice is focussed on financial remedies and cohabitation disputes.
Stuart is known for giving clear, practical and commercially minded advice.
Where appropriate, Stuart accepts instructions on a direct Public Access basis.
Notable cases:
S v S v S [Ongoing] – Family Court at Dartford (Intervenor)
Stuart is being led and is instructed on behalf of Intervenors in financial remedy proceedings. The case concerns 11 properties (including some held within a limited company); some of the properties are held in the joint names of the Respondent Wife and the Husband only and others in the names of all 4 parties. The Intervenors are the parents of the Respondent Husband. The Intervenors assert that all properties are held on trust by the Respondents for the Intervenors’ 100% benefit (either by way of resulting or constructive trust). The matter is listed before the lead Financial Remedies Judge in Kent.
B v M [2021] – Family Court at Canterbury
3-day final hearing. The case was complicated owing to the Family Home potentially having developmental opportunities, thus increasing its value. The Respondent Wife disputed the possibility of selling to a developer but secretly sought to sell to one. The Respondent also sought a significant departure from equality to meet, on the Applicant’s case, exaggerated capital and income needs. Stuart was successful in obtaining an Order for Sale of the Family Home as well as an equal division of capital assets on a “clean break” basis.
B v B – [2021] – Arbitration
Delays with listing a final hearing meant that the parties chose arbitration to conclude their dispute. Stuart represented the Applicant Wife who had returned home to Australia following separation. The case was complicated by assertions of non-matrimonial property, a child with Special Educational Needs, a high earning Respondent Husband and the quantification of “needs” abroad (i.e. an uncertain and changing property market in Perth, Australian stamp duty and, purchase costs). Despite Husband seeking a departure from equality in his favour (cf. unevidenced non-matrimonial assets), Stuart successfully argued for a departure from equality and “invasion” of assets to meet the Wife’s needs on a clean break basis.
S v S [2020] Family Court at Canterbury (Jurisdiction dispute)
Stuart opposed an application to rescind decree nisi and dismiss financial remedy proceedings notwithstanding a valid talaq having been granted in Oman.
I v D [2021] – County Court at Bromley
Stuart acted for the Claimant in a matter brought pursuant to the TLATA 1996. Stuart’s client was in a long-term cohabiting relationship. The parties had signed express declarations of trust in respect of their family home and an investment property which declared that they held both properties on trust for the Defendant as to 100% and 0% to the Claimant. Stuart was successful in setting aside both declarations of trust on the basis of his client having been presumed to have been unduly influenced by the Defendant. Stuart successfully established a relationship of trust and control between the parties arising from a coercive, controlling and physically abusive relationship. The Judge declared that the parties held both properties on trust for themselves in equal shares (subject to the ring fencing of the Defendant’s initial deposit contribution for the investment property). Stuart also successfully argued that the sale of the property should be delayed pending the parties’ child (who was 3 years old) reaching her majority on the basis that the purpose of the trust had not yet come to an end and her welfare needed to be considered per the s.15 factors.
Langford v Perrin [2020] – County Court at Central London – 4-day multi-track
Stuart successfully defended a claim brought by a former occupant of a property claiming a beneficial interest. Stuart successfully obtained an adverse costs order on the indemnity basis against the Claimant. The case was subsequently reported online here.
Financial Remedies
Stuart accepts instructions in all areas of financial remedy disputes (including Schedule 1 Applications)
Stuart attends at all stages of the process and places a strong emphasis on attempting to resolve disputes at or prior to FDR. Stuart is client focused and will always work alongside his solicitors to ensure the client achieves the best outcome to their circumstances.
Stuart’s written work extends to drafting and advising in respect of marital agreements.
Stuart is also able to accept instructions to act as a private FDR evaluator.
Stuart accepts instructions concerning the Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 and Proprietary estoppel. Stuart had a previous career in civil litigation and has a good understanding of the CPR which makes him well suited to advising and attending on these complex chancery claims. Stuart understands the cost implications of these cases (he is able to assist with CCMCs) and is able to attend at mediation as required.
Stuart is (or likes to think he is) a successful long-distance runner; he has completed several marathons and countless half marathons all over Europe.
When Stuart is not running (or in Court), he and his wife spend most of their spare time travelling and exploring with their young daughter; they can often be found somewhere between Canterbury and Whitstable on the “Crab and Winkle way”.
French (Fluent)
Instructing Stuart Snow
If you require help or advice please contact our clerking team.
Call +44 (0)20 7353 0711 or email clerks@pumpcourtchambers.com.