Foot-Dragging Divorcee Pays Price for Unnecessary COVID-19 Adjournment

10th October 2022 By

Some divorcees drag their feet in a misguided attempt to put off the hour when they must divide their assets with their ex-partners. However, a case involving a husband who caused costly delay when he asserted that he had COVID-19 showed that family judges are well able to detect and deal with such behaviour.

Ruling on the financial aspects of the man’s divorce, a judge found it highly likely that he had engaged in various delaying tactics with the aim of doing all he could to prolong the litigation and make it as difficult as possible for his ex-wife to bring the matter to a final conclusion.

The most egregious example occurred when he stated on the eve of a vital hearing that he had taken a positive lateral flow test for COVID-19 and that he was not well enough to attend remotely. The judge had no option but to adjourn the hearing, at substantial cost to the wife.

After she raised suspicions, the husband was ordered to undergo a PCR test, which came back negative. He continued to insist that he was very poorly at the time, but the judge was satisfied on the evidence that he did not have COVID-19 and that he could have attended the hearing.

The judge commented that his actions in failing to attend the hearing fitted with his modus operandi throughout the proceedings. He was not satisfied that the man’s stated health position was correct. The information that had been provided to the court was fully self-serving and had been contradicted by the PCR test.

The husband, the judge found, had failed to comply with court orders, deliberately protracted the proceedings and effectively cocked a snook at the court and the proceedings as a whole by orchestrating the adjourned hearing. To mark his litigation conduct, the judge took the rare step of ordering him to contribute £4,000 to the legal costs incurred by the wife in preparing for the adjourned hearing.

The marital assets had been eroded by the legal costs of the proceedings and were, at most, only just sufficient to meet the former couple’s needs. The judge directed a division of those assets with a view to achieving a clean break between them.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Relationship Status Put Under Spotlight in Divorce Case

26th February, 2024 By

Divorce proceedings are rarely cut and dry, especially where the passage of time adds complexity to matters. This was certainly so in a recent case that required a Family Court judge to rule on the validity of a decree nisi. The case centred on the divorce proceedings of a couple in their fifties and focused on a decree nisi that had been pronounced in 2012, following an application by the husband. Now seeking to finalise the divorce with a decree absolute, the husband asserted that the decree nisi had been properly...

Will Execution – Remote Witnessing Legislation Expires

22nd February, 2024 By

A legal amendment that was made during the COVID-19 pandemic allowing the witnessing of wills to take place via videoconferencing has officially expired. As of 31 January 2024, the Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020 is no longer active. It was introduced in response to the pandemic, as a means of facilitating the valid execution of wills via remote witnessing. The Order applied to wills made between 31 January 2020 and 31 January 2022, but was later extended to 31 January 2024. Section 9 of the Wills Act...

Psychotherapy Condition Leads to Contact Order Appeal

20th February, 2024 By

Wherever possible, the courts will do what they can to support contact between parents and children but, in some instances, that contact comes with conditions attached. The nature of such conditions was the cause of contention in recent appeal proceedings brought by the father of two young boys. The man appealed against a High Court order that allowed for contact periods with his children, which would progress from supervised to unsupervised and increase in length but were dependent upon him engaging in psychotherapy. This condition had been imposed following a...

Beware of Builders Offering Cut-Price Work – Court of Appeal Cautionary Tale

16th February, 2024 By

Every householder should understand the dire risks involved in opening their doors to those promising to carry out cut-price building work. A Court of Appeal decision provided distressing examples of almost the worst that can happen. A householder approaching retirement age was taken in by a workman who knocked on his door, offering to paint the front of his home for £1,000. He was introduced to another man – the offender – whom the workman described as his business partner. The pair proceeded, over a period of months, to carry...