Simon Beccle

Much of his work includes an international element and he frequently advises on choice of jurisdiction as well as on the removal of children out of the jurisdiction. Simon’s clients have included nationals of the USA, Canada, Australia, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Poland, and from the sports of horse racing, tennis and golf.

Simon is at the cutting edge of developing Family Law and is in a unique position of having had two family law cases heard in the House of Lords/Supreme Court, which have been reported both nationally and internationally.

Simon acted for Pamela White in the ground-breaking decision on the distribution of property and assets on divorce, White v White (2000), which provides for equality as the starting point in the division of assets to ensure the absence of discrimination between the breadwinner on the one hand and the homemaker on the other. This is still the current law.

Simon acted for Tini Owens in Tini Owens v Hugh John Owens (2018) in which the Supreme Court refused her a divorce notwithstanding the fact that the marriage had broken down irretrievably and the parties had separated. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the lower courts that in spite of Mrs Owens having provided 27 examples of Mr Owens’s behaviour towards her, he had not behaved in such a way that she could not reasonably be expected to live with him. To read the Judgment click on the following link: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2018/41.html

In the light of the Judgment in Tini Owens v Hugh John Owens, widespread sympathy for Mrs Owens for the way in which she had been treated by the Courts and the overwhelming support from the public, the media, judges, lawyers and politicians for a change in the law, the Government passed The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 to bring in “no fault” divorce, which came into effect on 6 April 2022.

Simon’s other reported cases include Court of Appeal decisions:

• In the Matter of R (Children) (2016) a Court of Appeal Judgment of Lords Justices McFarlane and Lindblom dismissing a father’s appeal against losing direct contact with his children.
• Hayat Youssef Alireza v Hossam Youssef Ibrahim Radwan and Others (2017) a widely reported Court of Appeal Judgement of Lady Justice Gloster, Law Justice Lewison and Lady Justice King relating to extent to which a prospective inheritance was capable of being a financial resource which could be taken into account in an application for financial relief in divorce proceedings. The case was remitted back to the High Court to determine extent of the lump sum Ms Alireza should receive from Mr Radwan.
• Tini Owens v Hugh John Owens (2017) a widely reported Court of Appeal Judgment of the President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby, Lady Justice Hallett and Lady Justice Macur refusing the wife a divorce.

and High Court decisions:

• RH v RH (2008) a High Court Judgment of Mr Justice Singer relating to financial remedy claims on divorce and costs.
• Seagrove v Sullivan (2014) a High Court Judgment of Mr Justice Holman in a cohabitee dispute involving claims under The Trusts of Law and Appointment of Trustees Act and under Schedule 1 of The Children Act.
• NR v AB (Financial Remedies) (2016) a High Court Judgment of Mrs Justice Roberts relating to financial remedy claims on divorce, the principle of the clean break and extent to which a prospective inheritance was capable of being a financial resource which could be taken into account in an application for financial relief in divorce proceedings.
• K, L and M (Children) (Child Arrangements Order) (2016) a High Court Judgment of Ms Justice Russell relating to child arrangements re a father losing direct contact with his children due to his conduct towards them.

• K, L and M (Children) (Child Arrangements Order) (2016) a High Court Judgment of Ms Justice Russell relating to child arrangements re a father losing direct contact with his children due to his conduct towards them.
• ABX and SBX and DX (2018) a High Court Judgment of Mr Justice Francis relating to financial remedy claims on divorce and issues concerning add backs, section 37 (set aside) applications and offer letters.
• MY v FY (2020) a High Court Judgment of Ms Justice Russell relating to child arrangements concerning an 8 year old boy and the Father’s wish to see him in circumstances where, whilst he undoubtedly loved his son, he had behaviour issues which made supervised contact necessary.
• SBX v ABX (2022) a High Court Judgment of Mr Justice Francis relating to Article 12 of the European Maintenance Regulations and whether various financial applications relating to the payment of school fees, mortgage, spousal and child periodical payments should be determined in England or in Country A, an unnamed Continental European Country which is part of the European Union. In this case, the Court determined that England was not the appropriate jurisdiction for these matters to be resolved and that Country A was seized with jurisdiction to deal with them. To read the concise Judgment click on the following link: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2022/3652.html
• L v O (Stay of Order; Hadkinson Order; Security for Costs) (2024) a High Court Judgment of Mr Justice Cobb which provides helpful guidance on potential interim remedies available in a case where one party is seeking to set aside a final financial order. In this case, the husband alleged that there had been a supervening event which invalidated the basis upon which the final order had been made. Given that all his assets were abroad, the Court ordered that, as a condition of him pursuing his set aside application, he should have to provide the wife with security for her costs of £480,000 so that if his application failed and a costs order was made against him, the wife would be covered for her legal costs.  To read the concise Judgment click on the following link: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2024/6

and a Central Family Court/County Court decision

• WK v GC (2023) a decision of HHJ Hess in which we obtained successfully on an application to vary a spousal maintenance order made in 2004, a capitalised lump sum based on an increased level of spousal maintenance to effect a clean break. It addressed issues such as housing and income needs, retirement, pensions, downsizing properties and inheritance prospects which matters are frequently raised when parties approach or reach retirement. To read the concise Judgment click on the following link: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2023/151.html

Whilst Simon has acted in numerous contested and reported cases, nearly all his cases (95%+) are resolved through negotiation and reaching agreement outside contested court proceedings.

Simon is recommended by the law directories as a leading family lawyer, including Chambers, Legal Experts and The Legal 500 UK in which he is highlighted for “his work with an international element”. Quotes include: “Simon Beccle was exceptionally responsive and conscientious and was measured and helpful” and “Simon Beccle is empathetic and wise – client care is second to none”.  He is listed in the Honours List for Leading Family & Matrimonial Lawyers in the Citywealth Leaders List 2024 and Spear’s 500 2024 as a Top Recommended Family Lawyer ranked “outstanding in field” with a specialist focus on “international divorce”.  He is also listed by The Spear’s Family Lawyers Index 2024 as “Top Recommended” and a “Leading Partner” by The Legal 500 UK 2025.

Simon is regularly quoted in the national and legal press.

From 2012 to 2018 Simon was Clerk to the Council and a Governor of Bradfield College, where he was also educated.

Simon took a degree in History before qualifying as a lawyer in 1990. Qualified 1990, joined Payne Hicks Beach 1998, partner 2001.

To learn more about divorce and separation visit our dedicated webpage and download our guide.