Divorce and Family Law

VB v JP (2008)

The principles of Miller/McFarlane were applied to an application to vary periodical payments including the concept of achieving fairness through compensation.

Crossley v Crossley (2008)

The Court of Appeal approved directions given by a High Court Judge requiring a wife to show good cause why a pre-nuptial agreement should not govern the division of assets on divorce.

Soulsbury v Soulsbury (2008)

An appeal by PRs of an estate against an order granting a payment to the wife of the deceased in lieu of her refusal to enforce PPs while he was alive. The appeal was dismissed. The Court of Appeal commented on the status of agreement between the parties, suggesting that, provided they did not prevent one party from applying to the Court for relief, such agreements could be enforceable, even if not converted into a Court Order.

A v A (No. 2 2008)

Judgment on costs issues arising from protracted ancillary relief proceedings. The High Court Judge commented on when Trustees were to be joined in ancillary relief proceedings and concluded that the wife bear the brunt of the unacceptably high cost burden because she had over-stated her case.

CR v CR (2007)

A High Court Judge reviewed the current law on post-separation assets and future income and rejected a claim for compensation by the wife. The concepts of equality and compensation were considered.

Lauder v Lauder (2007)

An appeal against orders concerning the variation of periodical payments. The couple had originally settled in 1988 but that order had never been implemented as it was agreed that the husband would continue to support the wife for life. She subsequently earned a modest salary and then retired, while the husband, partly using matrimonial assets had thrived in business. Baron J found that the wife had therefore been economically disadvantaged and so an element of compensation was added to the wife’s award. The judge also reviewed how the case sits with the authorities of White and Miller.

MacFarlane v MacFarlane (2004)

High-earning husband, non-working wife - contributions different but of equal value

 S v S (2004)

House to be sold when children leave home

Burns v Burns (2004)

Duty of candour; delay in making applications

Co v Co 2004 and M v M (2004)

Cohabitation before marriage taken into account

Kimber v Brookman (2004)

Protection of privilege

Lambert v Lambert (2002)

Wife's contribution in the home balances and contributes to husband's career

L v L (2002)

Account taken of husband's greater contribution

Wells v Wells (2002)

Division of assets can take account of uncertain future value of capital in own business and husband's under-funded pension

Cordle v Cordle (2002)

Equality of outcome desirable but subject to housing the carer of the children and enabling wife's return to work

Cowan v Cowan (2001)

Husband's share increased to allow development of business on which the whole family depended

D v D (2001)

Wife's lump sum application deferred pending husband's anticipated future capital

Cornick v Cornick No 3 (2001)

Redistribution in wife's favour as husband's income increased