Natasha Brown
CILEx LawyerNatasha advises on all areas of family law including divorce, financial remedy, children law matters and Family Law Act proceedings.
Natasha has worked exclusively in family law since 2010. She qualified as a CILEx Lawyer in 2020 after completing her studies with the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives and is a Fellow of CILEX with full authorisation to conduct litigation.
Natasha has a particular interest in complex children matters and has represented numerous clients in protracted domestic and international relocation disputes, including applications for leave to remove children from the jurisdiction.
She adopts a realistic, pragmatic and empathetic approach, recognising the challenges that family disputes can bring. Natasha is committed to ensuring that her clients feel supported, informed and reassured throughout the legal process, helping them navigate what is often a difficult and stressful time in their live
-
2017 Trainee (ACILEx), Levison Meltzer Pigott LLP
2020 Graduate Legal Executive (GCILEx), Levison Meltzer Pigott LLP
2021 Chartered Legal Executive (FCILEx), Ribet Myles LLP
Reported Cases
Marie-Therese Elisabeth Helene Hohenberg Bailey v Anthony John Bailey & Ors
[2022] EWFC 5
Natasha was part of the team acting for Princess Marie-Therese Hohenberg Bailey in a long-running dispute concerning the enforcement of financial orders made following divorce. Despite findings in the underlying financial remedy proceedings that the husband had been dishonest and had sought to frustrate the implementation of the court's orders, he continued to refuse to take steps required to enable the wife to receive her financial award. Following extensive enforcement proceedings, the Court found that the husband had acted in contempt of court and sentenced him to 12 months' imprisonment. Two third parties who had assisted in obstructing the implementation of the orders were also found in contempt. The decision demonstrates the Family Court's willingness to take robust action where parties deliberately ignore court orders and seek to prevent the enforcement of financial awards. It highlights the extensive powers available to the court, including committal to prison, when faced with serious and persistent non-compliance.

