Grasso v Naik & 20 other irregular divorce petitions (Queen’s Proctor intervening) [2017] EWHC 2789 (Fam)

Articles, News

14/11/2017

In this decision the President of Family Division, Sir James Munby, concurred with the submissions of the Queen’s Proctor that some 21 divorces had been tainted by fraud not least as the address given on the petition of one or other party to the petitions was a lie. Accordingly he ordered that all the decrees of divorce in the 21 petitions would be set aside and consequently the marriages subsist. Further the President ordered that the Queen’s Proctor’s costs be paid, on the indemnity basis, in all cases by a third Party namely a disbarred former barrister who had purported to act on behalf of a party to each petition.

Simon P G Murray of 1 Chancery Lane, a member of the Attorney General’s A Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown, was counsel for the Queen’s Proctor. A further report of the case can be found in the Law Gazette at https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/munby-cancels-21-divorces-handled-by-fraudster-ex-barrister/5063605.article .

Latest News & Events

Success for Andrew Warnock KC, Jack Harding and Gurion Taussig in the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that claims for compensation by a man who killed three people, but was acquitted by a jury in the Crown Court on the grounds of insanity, are barred by the doctrine of illegality. The Claimant, Mr Lewis-Ranwell, sought damages from…

The Dekagram: 19th January 2026

In this week’s Dekagram Dominique Smith examines a recent decision of the Court of Appeal considering and endorsing 90:10 split liability offers (contrary to the received wisdom following the decision of the High Court in Mundy v TUI [2023] EWHC 385 (Ch); and Robbie Parkin…

Kerry Nicholson writes about Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust and the implications for secondary victims in cross border cases for the Journal of Personal Injury Law

Kerry analyses Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust and the Supreme Court’s attempt to impose coherence on decades of caselaw from McLoughlin, Alcock and Frost through Walters, Shorter and Ronayne. She then asks the hard question for modern travel law practitioners: what, if anything, can claimants do…

© Deka Chambers 2026

Search

Portfolio Builder

Select the expertise that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)