Why Complex Family Cases Demand More Than Experience

AFP Blooms lifts the lid on complex family legal cases. 

Sophisticated families often have sophisticated problems. A divorce or separation will often be complicated and involve offshore trusts, disputed jurisdiction or assets spread across multiple countries. 

These matters call for a very specific kind of expertise. It isn’t enough to know the rules,  lawyers need specific experience of the High Court, agility across borders, and to be able to deliver clear advice under extreme pressure.

At AFP Bloom, we act in these cases every day. Over the last five years alone, our lawyers have appeared in around 20 reported decisions in the High Court, the Family Court and the Court of Appeal. These have included worldwide freezing injunctions, bearer share structures, section 37 avoidance of disposition claims, third‑party joinder applications and jurisdiction challenges under European and domestic regulations. They are very far from standard separations; they are cases where the architecture of the litigation matters as much as the individual hearings.

This piece looks at what makes a family case genuinely complex, and why doing this work well requires more than technical knowledge.

What makes a family case complex?

High net worth does not automatically mean high complexity. Wealth, in itself, is not the defining feature. What matters is how that wealth is structured, where it is held, and how willing the parties are to engage with their disclosure obligations.

Complex family litigation often involves one or more of the following:

• International asset structures
  Assets held through offshore companies, trusts or layered holding entities across multiple jurisdictions, frequently designed for tax efficiency, confidentiality or asset protection.
• Disputed jurisdiction
  Situations where one party argues the case should proceed in a different country, sometimes to secure a more favourable regime, sometimes to limit disclosure.
• Non‑disclosure or concealment
  Requiring forensic investigation, targeted questionnaires, third‑party disclosure and applications to compel production of documents.
• Strategic interim applications
  Including freezing injunctions, maintenance pending suit, section 37 applications or urgent variation and enforcement applications that shape the litigation long before any final hearing.
• Complex children matters
  Fact‑finding hearings, relocation disputes, allegations of harm or parental alienation that require detailed judicial examination and careful evidential preparation.
• Cross‑border enforcement
  Where a domestic order must be recognised and enforced abroad, sometimes in jurisdictions that are reluctant to cooperate or have very different enforcement mechanisms.

These elements rarely sit in isolation. A jurisdiction challenge can delay or reshape disclosure. Concealment may necessitate a short term freezing injunction. Offshore structures can trigger third‑party joinder and satellite litigation. Each layer adds to the procedural and strategic weight of the case. And sometimes the skill is not in deciding to make the application, but deciding when not to.

Why reported cases matter

Reported cases are not simply academic references. They are where the parameters of family law are tested and clarified. A judgment is reported because it does something more than resolve a private dispute. It may develop an area of law, clarify uncertainty, or set out an approach that courts and practitioners will follow.

For clients, and for the professionals who refer to us, involvement in reported cases signals several things:

• Comfort in the High Court and Court of Appeal
  Operating at this level means managing stricter procedure, more intensive judicial scrutiny and a far smaller margin for error.
• Experience with complex procedural architecture
  Running multi‑track litigation with interim relief, third‑party joinder, jurisdiction contests and enforcement all in play at the same time.
• Familiarity with corporate and trust structures
  Coordinating with offshore counsel, trustees and forensic accountants; understanding how entities operate in practice, not just on paper.
• Strategic litigation judgement
  Knowing when to press for a determination, when to settle, and how to position interim applications so they support (rather than derail!) the overall case strategy.

Litigation of this kind requires planning, patience and a clear view of how each procedural step will influence the eventual outcome.

Where family law meets corporate structures

In complex cases, assets are rarely held in a single personal account or in a straightforward property portfolio. They sit within companies, trusts, partnerships and offshore vehicles, usually for entirely legitimate reasons. In a divorce, those structures create questions: about disclosure, control, value and enforceability.

A company may own the family home. Corporate ownership may be opaque and involve trusts. Partnerships operate within the structures. Each of these has its own rules, documents, decision‑makers and tax consequences. Unpicking them calls for commercial understanding and genuine collaboration with other advisers, alongside a rigorous knowledge of family law. 

This is where some family litigation falters. Corporate and trust structures are not front‑and‑centre in traditional family law training. Yet in sophisticated cases, they often sit at the heart of the dispute. Working effectively here means:

• reading and understanding corporate and trust documentation,
• Identifying the questions that the documentation ask,
• Knowing who to direct those questions to and having working relationships with those experts
• identifying where practical control is really exercised,
• engaging constructively (and, when necessary, robustly) with trustees, directors and professional advisers,
• and crafting orders that can actually be implemented.

AFP Bloom treats the corporate architecture as part of the case.

The importance of strategic interim positioning

In complex family litigation, the final hearing is rarely the only decisive moment. Often, the critical moves happen earlier, in interim applications that set the tone, preserve the asset base and determine whether there is funding to litigate on equal terms.

Used well, interim relief can:

• prevent dissipation through freezing injunctions or other section 37 orders,
• secure interim funding to ensure a level playing field,
• and obtain disclosure and information that would otherwise be slow, partial or non‑existent.

Used poorly, it can escalate conflict, drain costs and weaken the overall position if applications fail.

Judgement is essential. Not every concern justifies an emergency application; not every risk can be dealt with through orders alone. In cross‑border cases, that judgement becomes even more important. An English freezing order may be of limited value if assets can be moved through jurisdictions that do not recognise it, or if parallel relief is not obtained swiftly abroad.

Coordinated action across multiple jurisdictions requires planning, speed and a network of trusted foreign counsel, all while keeping the client informed and the overall strategy coherent.

Stamina, clarity and client care over time

Truly complex cases can take years, and they may involve multiple substantive hearings, repeated disclosure disputes, enforcement steps and appeals. They demand sustained focus, flexibility and honest conversations with clients about cost and risk.

Doing this work well means:

• maintaining a clear strategic thread as the case evolves,
• adapting when new information or assets emerge,
• managing expectations without losing momentum,
• and ensuring clients feel informed and supported rather than overwhelmed by process.

It also means being candid about costs. Significant litigation is expensive. Clients need to understand not only what each application costs, but what it is intended to achieve, and whether it aligns with their wider objectives.

AFP Bloom’s involvement in long‑running matters such as the Simon v Level or RC v FP [2025] EWFC 123 litigation (both with Court of Appeal stages) reflects that combination of stamina and clarity. These are not cases that can be run on autopilot.

When to instruct a specialist firm

Not every divorce needs High Court or Court of Appeal expertise. Many can and should be resolved more simply. But there are clear indicators that a specialist firm is needed:

• assets held through offshore entities or complex structures,
• a real prospect of disputed jurisdiction,
• significant non‑disclosure or deliberate obstruction,
• children issues requiring detailed fact‑finding or expert evidence,
• or financial consequences so substantial that an error cannot easily be corrected.

In those situations, choosing a firm with proven experience at the highest level is essential. It is about capability: having lawyers who understand procedural strategy, who are comfortable in heavyweight litigation, and who can coordinate outcomes across borders and disciplines.

Complex family litigation sits at the intersection of law, business and real lives. Handled well, it protects not just the balance sheet, but the future that sits behind it.