A High Court judge has ruled that once a clean-break financial order takes effect following divorce, the court no longer has power to grant a Legal Services Payment Order (LSPO) to fund further legal proceedings.

Mr Justice Peel said the legislation allowing LSPOs applies only while financial-remedy proceedings remain active. After a clean break, he said, “there are no proceedings in which a LSPO can be made”.

Background to the dispute

The case involved a hospital consultant and his former wife, a nurse, who married in 1999 and divorced in 2023. Following contested financial-remedy proceedings at the Family Court, District Judge Barry ordered the sale of the former matrimonial home, equal division of proceeds and a clean break, with no ongoing maintenance payments.

The wife was dissatisfied with the outcome and launched a series of further applications, including to adjourn the final hearing, to appeal, to set aside the final order, and to obtain freezing injunctions against her former husband. All these steps proved unsuccessful.

In June 2025, she applied for an LSPO of £50,000 to fund two pending matters – an appeal to the Court of Appeal over a discharged freezing order, and a further application to set aside the 2023 financial order.

No power once clean break has taken effect

Mr Justice Peel said section 22ZA of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 allows a court to make a payment order “in proceedings for financial relief in connection with divorce”. But those proceedings had ended with a clean break on 8 December 2023.

He ruled that the court’s power to make an LSPO ceases at that point, even if one party later seeks to appeal, enforce, or set aside the order. “If a final order has been made, claims have been dismissed, and the proceedings have ended, it cannot be that a party may thereafter invoke s. 22ZA for an ancillary purpose,” the judge said.

He added that where an order specifies that a clean break takes effect immediately, no LSPO can be sought afterwards. Only where a clean break is stated to take effect upon implementation of the order could a party apply for an LSPO until implementation is complete.

Applications dismissed

The judge concluded that both of the wife’s applications – for an LSPO relating to her Court of Appeal case and for another to fund her set-aside application – must be dismissed.

The set-aside application itself was transferred back to the Family Court for consideration.

Please contact us if you would like more information about the issues raised in this article or any aspect of family law.

CC v UU [2025] EWFC 214
Family Court, Royal Courts of Justice
Mr Justice Peel
Judgment date: 15 July 2025