fbpx

Given a Raw Deal by a Divorce Judge? Don't Just Sit on Your Hands

18th February 2021 By

Many divorcees feel that judges have given them a raw deal when dividing up marital assets. They may or may not be right about that but, as one case strikingly showed, it makes much better sense for them to seek swift professional advice than to sit on their hands dwelling on what might have been.

The case concerned a middle-aged couple whose relationship lasted for almost 15 years and resulted in two children prior to their divorce. Their assets comprised over £400,000 yielded from the sale of their former matrimonial home and the husband’s shares in two companies, which were valued at about £6.2 million.

Following a hearing, a district judge ordered the husband to pay the wife a lump sum of over £3 million within five years. Pending payment, he was required to pay interest on that sum at 4 per cent over base rate. Together with £4,750 a month in maintenance, he was ordered to pay her 25 per cent of any bonuses he received and 50 per cent of any dividends. She was awarded 75 per cent of the proceeds of the property sale and he was required to pay the children’s school fees.

In applying for permission to appeal against the district judge’s order, the husband argued that he had suffered a grave injustice and that he could not afford to comply with it. He asserted, amongst other things, that the district judge had taken precisely half of the value of his shareholdings in two private companies without any indication as to how he would be able to raise the required lump sum within five years or at all.

Refusing his application, however, a more senior judge noted that, under the rules of procedure which govern family justice, he had 21 days from the date of the district judge’s decision in which to seek permission to appeal. His notice of appeal had in fact been issued more than 15 months after that deadline passed. The delay was serious and there was no good explanation for it.

Noting that a right of appeal is not something that can be stored up in case it might be of future use, the judge could find no good reason for extending the deadline. The husband’s complaints, whilst arguable, were not overwhelming, and the delay in lodging his appeal had caused clear prejudice to the wife in that she had been prevented from moving on with her life.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Tax Tribunal Rules Peripatetic Businessman 'Ordinarily Resident' in the UK

26th February, 2021 By

Many businesspeople lead peripatetic lives of constant international travel and the crucial question of whether they are settled in the UK for tax purposes can be very difficult to answer. A First-tier Tribunal (FTT) ruling, however, revealed the lengths to which HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will go to establish that a taxpayer is ordinarily resident in this country. The case concerned the tax treatment of £578,400 received by an overseas national on the severance of an employment contract. He claimed that, by virtue of Section 414 of the Income...

High Court Uncovers Blatant Forgery as Will Dispute Tears Family Apart

24th February, 2021 By

If an elderly man had listened to his solicitor's repeated advice to make a will, his children would have avoided a sea of trouble after his death. His failure to do so resulted in a bitter High Court dispute and a judge's finding that one of his daughters resorted to forgery in a bid to inherit almost everything he owned. Following his death, his daughter claimed to have discovered a photocopy of his will. The home-made document – the original of which was never found – purported to bequeath to...

Renting Out Your Home on AirBnB Without Legal Advice is a Grave Mistake

23rd February, 2021 By

Many tenants who forego legal advice before subletting their homes to tourists and other short-term visitors do so in blissful ignorance that they may well be breaching the terms of their leases. That was certainly so in the case of a flat dweller whose use of AirBnB placed the roof over his head in jeopardy. After receiving complaints from the man's neighbours, his landlord took action before the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and obtained a declaration under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 that he had breached covenants in his...

Given a Raw Deal by a Divorce Judge? Don't Just Sit on Your Hands

18th February, 2021 By

Many divorcees feel that judges have given them a raw deal when dividing up marital assets. They may or may not be right about that but, as one case strikingly showed, it makes much better sense for them to seek swift professional advice than to sit on their hands dwelling on what might have been. The case concerned a middle-aged couple whose relationship lasted for almost 15 years and resulted in two children prior to their divorce. Their assets comprised over £400,000 yielded from the sale of their former matrimonial...