"Jeremy Posnansky QC is praised by a source as "fiercely intellectual and practical." He is often involved in high-profile, highly complex financial and technical cases, and continues to appear in court on behalf of his clients. One observer highlights his ability to "bring a skill set as a QC that clients love." A market commentator says: "Superlative. He is an absolutely amazing guy. He knows a lot about a lot.""
Chambers & Partners
Jeremy has undertaken cases at all levels, up to the House of Lords and Supreme Court. His practice has embraced cases of the greatest complexity, frequently with an international dimension. He has expertise in all areas of family law and continues to deal with all aspects of divorce, financial proceedings, matters relating to children, and pre-nuptial agreements.
He advises in a wide range of cases, including highly complex ones, and has acted for a number of high profile clients from a variety of different backgrounds. A recent case of major importance was Prest v Petrodel in which Jeremy was the lead partner and did some of the advocacy. The case, which was determined in our client’s favour, was ultimately decided by the UK Supreme Court. It was an extremely complex divorce case, the importance of which extends far beyond family law and into vital aspects of company law.
For many years, Jeremy has been rated one of the leading family law QCs in London in both Chambers & Partners UK Guide to the Legal Profession and the Legal 500. Extracts include:
- "Jeremy Posnansky QC brings a skill set as a QC that clients love ... He is fiercely intellectual and practical and has a strong reputation for complex financial cases." (Chambers & Partners)
- "He undertakes challenging matrimonial finance disputes and is described as 'an attractive courtroom advocate with a good sense of humour.'" (Chambers & Partners)
- "After a long and successful career at the independent bar, Jeremy Posnansky QC has now re-qualified as a solicitor and handles much of the firm's advocacy in this area. "The wise man of family law," he concentrates on complex financial and children matters frequently with an international dimension." (Chambers & Partners)
- "Turns his hand to both financial and children’s work, but has a higher profile for the former. An all-rounder, he is a highly commercial, tough operator who tells you how it is. He is extremely thorough and careful, as well as deeply experienced." (Chambers & Partners)
- "A dab hand at both children and money and famed for his penetrating analysis of the issues in cases of the greatest magnitude, many of them international in scope. His is a quiet but deadly approach." (Chambers & Partners)
- "First class ... superb attention to detail and negotiating skills" (Chambers & Partners)
17 March 2016
BD v FD [2016 EWHC] (Fam) 595
A case involving very substantial assets, largely inherited, and consideration of how the other spouse’s needs should be assessed. The court also considered the consequence of profligate spending by one spouse in the period leading up to the trial.
12 June 2013
Prest v Petrodel  UKSC 34
A case of major importance in family and corporate law, involving the doctrine of piercing corporate veils.
27 June 2012
Y v Y  EWHC 2063 (Fam)
An important divorce case, involving a landed estate and inherited assets
24 May 2011
Whaley v Whaley  EWCA Civ 617
a Court of Appeal case about trusts in the context of divorce
24 May 2006
McFarlane v McFarlane  UKHL 24
a landmark case heard in the House of Lords in 2006 with Miller v Miller.
24 November 2006
NA v MA  EWHC 2900 (Fam)
A rare case about a post-nuptial agreement.
03 December 2004
Blunkett v Quinn  EWHC 2816 (Fam)
a high profile case involving a child of unmarried parents.
20 August 2008
W v H  EWHC 2038 (Fam)
A "big money" case concerning practice and procedure where one party seeks to shorten the litigation on the basis that an agreement has already been concluded (and the other party disputes that).
27 March 2002
Wells v Wells  EWCA Civ 476
a key decision of the Court of Appeal establishing principles of how assets of different types should be divided on divorce.
09 November 2001
X v X, Y & Z intervening  EWHC 11 (Fam)
a case analysing the way the courts treat agreements between divorcing parties.
01 November 2000
A v A  1 FLR 377
a landmark decision in which the principle was established that one spouse could be ordered to pay interim maintenance to the other for the purpose of meeting legal fees for the divorce and related proceedings.
27 March 1997
S v S  2 FLR 100
the first important decision concerning a pre-nuptial agreement in an international forum dispute.