Sabina Ahmed

Sabina advises clients on complex financial remedy proceedings involving mid to high-value assets, involving complex business structures, foreign assets, pensions, dissipation of assets, and where satellite applications are required.

• Represented the applicant wife in highly contested financial remedy proceedings where an application under s.37 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 was required to safeguard the matrimonial pot due to the husband’s wanton dissipation of assets.
• Represented a client in a successful application for a maintenance pending suit (MPS) application where the sudden cessation of maintenance left the client on the brink of homelessness.
• Acted for a client in a successful application for a legal services payment order which enabled them to be legally represented throughout their proceedings and placed them on an equal footing to their spouse.
• Successfully defended an application made by a client’s mother-in-law as an intervener who was trying to claim a beneficial interest in the family home.
• In the reported case Akhter v Khan [2018] EWFC 54, Sabina represented Mr Khan in divorce proceedings where he argued the religious marriage ceremony conducted between himself and Ms Akhter was a non-marriage, requesting Ms Akhter’s divorce application be struck out. The status of the marriage was to be determined as either valid, void, or a non-marriage under s.11 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Mr Justice Williams declared the marriage as void, which would have resulted in Ms Akhter being able to claim financial provision. Subsequently, the Court of Appeal overturned the ruling in February 2020 (Akhter v Khan [2020] EWCA Civ 122).

Sabina advises parents in complex private children law disputes, including relocation, contact restoration, allegations of harm, and emergency applications preventing the removal of a child from the jurisdiction.

• Successfully obtained an urgent non-molestation and occupation order on behalf of a father to ensure the safety of his children and himself from the respondent mother.
• Represented the applicant mother in making an emergency prohibited steps order to ensure the child was not removed from the jurisdiction by the father to a non-Hague country.
• Represented a client in a successful national relocation case.
• Successfully defended a maternal grandmother’s special guardianship application, which resulted in the client being granted a “lives with” order after a period of two years where the child’s mother had prevented contact between the client and the child.
• Represented and advised the applicant father on an international relocation application for his two children to a non-Hague Convention country, with issues including parental alienation and allegations of emotional and physical abuse by the respondent mother. The case involved the involvement of psychological experts, a 16.4 Guardian and the children speaking with the Judge directly.
• Represented the mother in acrimonious private law children proceedings where the children were appointed a 16.4 Guardian and where the client had been a long-standing victim of domestic abuse and coercive control. Included the preparation of a five-day fact-finding hearing and a Re W hearing to establish if the children should give evidence.
• Assisted clients in reaching settlements at round-table meetings or mediation to avoid the instigation of proceedings where possible.

Sabina regularly advises cohabiting couples in relation to financial and property disputes following the breakdown of their relationship. She also advises in respect of any financial claims made for the benefit of a child of the family under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989.

• Represented a client in respect of a Schedule 1 claim for a lump sum specifically to meet the child’s disability needs. Included dealing with the interplay between such a claim and a TOLATA claim in respect of the client’s own interest in the home.
• Successfully defended an enforcement application in relation to unpaid child maintenance and a spin-off Schedule 1 claim made by the mother in order to circumvent the decision made within the enforcement proceedings.
• Represented a client in a dispute over the extent of his and his ex-partner’s respective ownership in their property. Assisted in achieving a favourable settlement for the client prior to the private FDR taking place.

Member of Resolution