Sheren specialises in family work. She is commended for her attention to detail and client care in complex financial remedy matters and disputes involving children. Her experience includes financial remedy proceedings, financial provision under the Children Act 1989, applications under Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, applications under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 and all types of private law children applications.
Sheren combines a sympathetic ability to understand her clients with a practical approach, and the ability to get to the heart of an issue swiftly.
Re N (Children)  EWCA Civ 903 – https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/903.html
Re C (A Child)  7 WLUK 785 (Provision under Sch 1 CA 1989)
Re M-A (A child)  EWCA Civ 896 – https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2018/896.html
Re A  EWCA Civ 294
CD v. Isle of Anglesey County Council  EWHC 1635 – https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2004/1635.html
Re MA (Disclosure of Information)  1 FLR 443
FINANCIAL REMEDY PROCEEDINGS
Sheren represented a Wife who was responding to a claim by a Husband, from whom she had separated ten years earlier, after a twelve year bigamous marriage. There were issues about the extent of the matrimonial assets, post separation acquired assets and post separation accrual, hidden assets and whether the Husband could rely on the Wife’s bigamy as conduct such that it would be inequitable to disregard. Sheren successfully persuaded the Court to limit the orders made in favour of the Husband so that he received/retained just 18% of the available resources.
In a case where the parties had agreed to transfer the matrimonial home to the Husband during the marriage as a consequence of the Wife accruing substantial credit card debts, Sheren represented the Husband and secured an order preserving the matrimonial home for the Husband (the only matrimonial asset) and a clean break from the Wife, without the Husband making any payment to the Wife. Sheren represented the Wife in a case where the Husband had dissipated a substantial proportion of the parties’ wealth. She successfully persuaded the Court to make an order that the Wife receive all the matrimonial assets plus a further lump sum that the Husband was expecting to receive as part of a business transaction.
A case where the Wife sought a substantial lump sum from the Husband, whose assets were limited to the Farm he inherited from his parents. Sheren represented the Husband. The lump sum order made by the Court was limited to just 5% of the value of the Farm.
In a case where the Husband argued that the parties had reached a concluded agreement in regard to their finances following separation six years prior to the Wife’s application for a financial order, Sheren represented the Wife and obtained a lump sum and pension sharing order in her favour.
PRIVATE LAW CHILDREN
Represented a father in Children Act proceedings where the mother was hostile to the children spending any time with the father and having a relationship with the father. The mother persistently breached orders. The Court made an order that the children live with the father and that he make the children available to spend time with the mother at his discretion.
In Children Act proceeding where the Cafcass Officer was recommending that the children remain living with the father, Sheren successfully sought and obtained an order that the children live with the mother. The Cafcass officer was persuaded during her own evidence to change her recommendation as a result of the answers given in cross examination of the father, that demonstrated father’s hostility to the mother was such that it was in the children’s best interests to move to live with the mother.
Sheren represented a mother who was resisting an application made by the father (a Greek national) for a child arrangements order in relation to two children who had had very negative experiences of spending time with him and opposed spending time with him. The children have been subject of litigation for a number of years, during which time the father made various allegations. Indirect contact had been in place for a number of years and the father sought direct contact. Sheren successfully argued that the indirect contact order should continue and that an order should be made pursuant to section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989, prohibiting the father from making any further applications in relation to the children without the leave
of the Court to last until each of the children reach the age of 16 years.
Sheren represented a father in proceedings bought by his step daughter seeking an order that the father make his daughter available to spend time with her. Sheren assisted the parties to reach negotiated settlement.