Barrister profile for UK Bar 2021
Chambers Research is conducted by 200 Research Analysts, across 200 jurisdictions and provides nearly 6,000 rankings tables. Annually we collect hundreds of thousands of responses from clients, the majority via in-depth interview. Learn more about our methodology.
Family: Matrimonial Finance - London (Bar)
Respected advocate whose busy family law practice encompasses financial remedy cases and private children law. She is experienced in handling cases concerning relocation and child abduction, and also represents clients in applications relating to periodical payment orders.
Strengths: "Robust in terms of her cross-examination, she prepares thoroughly for cases and goes the extra mile." "Gets to grips with the issues and is very approachable."
This content is provided by Katherine Dunseath
Katherine specialises in a broad range of financial matters including under the Matrimonial Causes Act, Schedule 1 of the Children Act, TOLATA and under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act.
She regularly represents high net worth clients on cases involving complex business structures, offshore trusts and shares. She has a particular expertise in cases involving complex maintenance issues and was junior counsel in the Supreme Court case of Mills v Mills  UKSC 38.
She also regularly represents clients on Child Maintenance appeals in the First Tier Tribunal.
Private children law matter
She specialises in private children law matters with particular expertise in cases involving jurisdictional issues such as leave to remove from the jurisdiction and child abduction at both first instance and on appeal. Other complex cases of note in the High Court include representing a mother applying for a declaration that the child undergo an operation in order to correct a deformed face and representing a party opposing a medical procedure being proposed on religious grounds.
She has appeared in all levels of court in the UK.
She was shortlisted for Family Law Junior Barrister of the year at the Family Law Awards 2017.
Judicial Assistant, Court of Appeal (March – July 2008)
Blue Book Stagiaire, European Commission (October 2007- February 2008)
Stage Scholar, Gray’s Inn
Prince of Wales Scholar, Gray’s Inn
June 2019: with J. Bazley QC: Considering the impact of the wrong box on a divorce petition, June  Fam Law
September 2018: with J. Wescott: Periodical Payments, no second bite  FLJ 179
July/August 2017: with C. Lloyd-Smith: Parental Abduction within the UK (Issue 189 Resolution)
March 2017: with F. Feehan QC: Varying maintenance: Mills, March  Fam Law
November 2016: with R. Harrison QC and S. Craddock: Should I stay or should I go? Where the clandestine removal of a child from the jurisdiction is not unlawful: LM v DR, November  Fam Law
August 2016: with J. Chegwidden: A clear conclusion: religious circumcision for boys, August  Fam Law
July 2016: Babies relinquished by foreign nationals: leading guidance, July  Fam Law
M v P (the Queen’s Proctor Intervening)  EWFC 14
Highly publicised case before Sir James Munby led by Janet Bazley QC opposing an application by the Queen’s Proctor to strike out (on the basis of it being void) the decree of divorce in circumstances where the petitioner initially by mistake relied upon the wrong facts in his petition, the court having missed the error then granted the decrees nisi and absolute. The parties then remarried before the error was identified by the court.
Mills v Mills  UKSC 38
Appeal before the Supreme Court which was highly publicised. This appeal was from the Court of Appeal’s decision in circumstances where the ex-wife had received a lump sum in the financial proceedings to allow her to rehouse and had depleted all of this capital. Led by Frank Feehan QC.
The CoA had allowed the ex-wife’s appeal and increased her maintenance order to include all of her rent. The Supreme Court found that the judge at first instance had justified the maintenance award made and why there be no further increase to include her full rental costs on the basis of her financial mismanagement.
Mills v Mills  EWCA Civ 129
Appeal by the ex-wife from decision of the judge at first instance on application to vary the maintenance order under s.31 of the MCA in respect of a joint lives maintenance order. Led by Frank Feehan QC. The ex-husband applied to discharge the maintenance order and the ex-wife applied to increase the quantum to include her full rental costs. Neither application was granted at first instance. The CoA increased the maintenance level to include all of the ex-wife’s rental costs.
In the matter of X, Y and Z (children) (Retrospective Leave to Remove from the Jurisdiction)  EWHC 2439 (Fam)
Application for retrospective leave to remove the children from the jurisdiction in circumstances where the mother had abducted them and return orders had been made which she breached. The circumstances had now changed as the children had now been living aboard for a number of years and were settled.
LM and DR (Return to Non-Convention Country)  EWHC 1943 (Fam)
Abduction case before MacDonald J under the inherent jurisdiction led by Richard Harrison QC. The father had abducted the child, obtained a prohibited steps order and opposed the child’s return. Application for return to Azerbaijan granted.
Re L and B (Children) (Specific Issues: Temporary Leave to remove from the jurisdiction; circumcision)  EWHC 849 (Fam)
Leading James Chegwidden before Roberts J, this was the father’s application for the children to be circumcised (on non-medical grounds) and for permission to take then on holiday to France and to Algeria. These applications were refused.
In the matter of JL and AO (Babies relinquished for adoption)  EWHC 440 (Fam)
One of two cases before Baker J (as was) where the parents were not English but were working in this jurisdiction and had requested that their baby be adopted in England. Led by Frank Feehan QC. The issues included whether their greater family in their country of origin be informed of the situation (contrary to their wishes), whether the baby be sent to their country of origin where further decisions be made and whether care orders be made. Baker J (as was) gave leading guidance.
Guerroudj v Rymarczyk  EWCA Civ 743
This was an appeal in the Court of Appeal in respect of a transfer of tenancy case under Part VI of the Family Law Act 1996. The appeal was in respect of the judge’s decision to set aside a previous order transferring the tenancy to him and then transferring the tenancy instead to his ex-girlfriend given his back problems and her assertions that the LA were likely to rehouse him and not her given his disabilities.