Daniel handles a wide variety of family law issues, with particular emphasis on resolving financial matters following divorce and applications concerning children. He has particular experience of high net worth and international finance cases and complicated children cases, including those involving children born into same-sex families, complex mental health issues and international relocation cases. Daniel is a trained mediator and collaborative family lawyer, as well as a determined litigator when required.

Daniel has acted for a wide range of clients including senior businessmen and women, bankers, lawyers and accountants, entrepreneurs, medical professionals, professional sportsmen and women, actors and those in the film industry, senior policemen and members of the military, and their spouses and partners. Many of Daniel’s clients are in the public eye and, as such, discretion and privacy are key concerns. 

Daniel has been recommended by the leading directories, Chambers UK and Legal 500 UK, for many years. The Legal 500 UK 2020 describes Daniel as a “meticulous lawyer with fantastic judgement“. The 2022 and 2021 directory names Daniel as a leading individual for family law noting he is ‘extremely able and savvy litigator‘ and who is strong on high-net-worth and international finance matters. The 2021 directory comments: “Absolutely meticulous in his preparation yet able to see the wood from the trees and provide coherent strategic advice right from the get go. An absolute pleasure to work with“. The 2017 edition described him as “tough, tenacious and very smart… he is loved by clients“.  Chambers UK 2020 notes: “he’s very pragmatic and focused on getting a result,” adding: “His attention to detail is second to none.” The Chambers UK 2021 edition comments of Daniel: “He is brilliant on technical cases which require a high level of legal analysis“ and “He’s very good on international work.” Daniel was named as one of the leading family lawyers by Best Lawyers 2020.

Daniel’s recent cases have included:

• Acting for the husband in a complicated divorce involving injunctions and financial and children proceedings spread over three continents.
• Acting for a father who lived abroad and wanted his children to move from England, where they were living with their mother, to live with him. Only the youngest child wanted to move so the case involved separating siblings. The father argued successfully for the youngest child to live with him.
• Acting for the husband who had mental health issues in a complex case in which the wife was a very high earner and the husband had been a ‘stay at home dad’.
• Acting for a father in difficult proceedings in which the mother sought an order relaxing the restrictions placed on her spending time with her child. The application was opposed by the father on the grounds that there were risks of abduction and manipulation of the child. The case required the input of multiple psychiatrists and experts, and the consideration of foreign judgments in related previous proceedings. The court found in the father’s favour.
• Acting for clients in contested jurisdiction proceedings, including, for example, for the wife of a multi-millionaire living in Monaco. The husband wanted the divorce and financial proceedings to be dealt with in Monaco where his financial exposure would have been less. Daniel successfully argued for the divorce to be dealt with in England and a financial settlement favourable to Daniel’s client was achieved here.
• Acting for former husbands and wives in applications to vary existing maintenance obligations.

Daniel’s reported cases include:

• L v L&H where Daniel acted for the husband in his successful action against his wife and solicitors. The case involved obtaining an emergency injunction seeking the return of our client’s laptop after it was taken by his wife. The case was ground-breaking and ultimately led to a change in the law.
• Acting as London agent on the important case of Re G (Children), involving children of a same sex relationship. Daniel successfully applied to the House of Lords to overturn a previous court decision which ordered that the children should no longer live with their biological mother.