Last week the President of the Family Division Sir Andrew McFarlane announced that the new Financial Remedies Courts (’FRCs’) are now ‘live’ across all areas of England and Wales.

For the benefit of those who don’t know, the term ‘financial remedies’ refers to all family court proceedings relating to financial issues. These primarily consist of proceedings relating to the financial settlement on divorce, but also include other types of proceedings, including claims for financial provision for children.

Note that financial remedies does not include child support maintenance claims, which are dealt with by the Child Maintenance Service.

Until recently, financial remedy applications were all dealt with by the local family court. However, in 2016 it was suggested that a national network of specialist courts be set up to deal with financial remedy cases. A pilot scheme was then set up in 2018, to test the idea.

The pilot has now been successfully completed, and the President says that “the FRCs should henceforth be regarded as an established and permanent part of the Family Court.”

But what does this mean for anyone involved in a financial remedies case?

Well, the big thing is that word ‘specialist’. This means both that FRCs are particularly ‘geared’ to deal with financial remedy cases and, in particular, that the judges dealing with the cases will be specialists in financial remedy work.

This in turn should mean that financial remedy cases should in future be dealt with more efficiently, and with better, more consistent, outcomes. Such consistency should also make it easier for lawyers to advise clients, thereby making it more likely that cases can be settled without having to go to court.

Lastly, it should be noted that there are still two types of family-related financial cases that are not currently dealt with by FRCs. These are trusts of land cases (usually involving property claims following the breakdown of cohabitation) and Inheritance Act cases, where a claim is made against the estate of the deceased, often by a family member.

However, the President has expressed the hope that both of these types of case will, in due course, also be dealt with by FRCs.

Whatever type of financial remedy case you are involved in, you should seek expert legal advice. We can find you an expert lawyer that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

The biggest divorce news of the week is of course that Kim Kardashian has reportedly filed for divorce from Kanye West. This latest celebrity divorce has already filled huge numbers of column-inches in newspapers and magazines across the world.

Our fascination for celebrity divorce seems to know no bounds. But can we actually learn anything useful from them? Anything that may be of relevance to ‘ordinary’ people going through marriage breakdown?

Well, sometimes we can, especially when (to the obvious delight of newspaper editors) the divorce gets ‘nasty’. Hopefully, Ms Kardashian and Mr West’s divorce, if it goes ahead, will not fall into this bracket, but sadly many celebrity divorces do, just as do many divorces involving ‘ordinary’ people.

Watching the awful spectacle of a nasty celebrity divorce play out in front of the world’s media must surely act as a warning to all: don’t let this happen to me.

And you don’t have to let it happen. You are in control. There are many things that you can do to avoid an unpleasant divorce. We have given much of this advice here previously, but it merits regular repetition.

Put the animosity of the breakup behind you – Obviously, many marriage breakdowns involve considerable animosity, and a simple mistake that parties make is to carry that animosity over to the divorce proceedings.

This can take many forms, from making irrelevant allegations against the other party, to seeking unrealistic outcomes. All of which will, of course, simply add to the stress, cost and time that the case will take to resolve.

Obviously, it is easy to say that animosity should be left behind, but hard to do it. However, all parties should try.

Concentrate on what is important – The important things in a divorce case are firstly sorting out arrangements for any dependent children and secondly sorting out the financial settlement.

But all too often parties will get side-tracked by other matters, or by matters that they think are relevant to children or finances, but actually are not. And this is where our next point comes in:

Follow advice – Take the best legal advice you can, and follow it. Your lawyer will tell you what is important or relevant, and what is not, and will ensure that you concentrate on the issues that really matter.

We can find you an expert lawyer that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

Consider mediation – Lastly, remember that court proceedings are not the only way to resolve a family dispute. Try to resolve the matter by agreement, and if that is not possible, consider using mediation as a way of resolving matters.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

We wrote here in January about a case in which the husband was seeking rent from the wife in relation to her occupation of the former matrimonial home.

As we explained then the husband was appealing to the Court of Appeal against a ruling that the wife was not liable to pay rent of £5,000 per week (a total of £600,000) to the husband in relation to the period that she occupied the property before it was sold.

The Court of Appeal has now handed down its judgment. It found in favour of the wife, and therefore dismissed the husband’s appeal.

The appeal revolved around the interpretation of a consent court order that was drawn up in 2016, setting out the terms of an agreed financial settlement between the husband and the wife.

The order provided that the wife was to receive a lump sum settlement of £11.5 million, £6.5 million straight away, with the balance due when the house was sold. However, the sale was delayed, and did not take place until 2019.

The order did not specifically state that the wife should pay rent to the husband, but the husband argued that it would be ‘absurd’ not to imply a term into the agreement requiring the wife to pay rent – the parties would surely have agreed this had they known that the sale would take so long.

The Court of Appeal disagreed. The matter turned solely upon what the consent order said. As it did not say that the wife should pay rent, she was not obliged to do so.

The case demonstrates the need to be specific when drafting court orders. Care should be given to take into account all reasonable possibilities, and to provide for them accordingly, either by agreeing the matter with the other party, or by requesting the court to include a suitable provision in any order.

It may now be that a rental clause will be sought in any similar agreement, as a matter of course.

But that obviously means that this would have to be taken into account when negotiating the amount that the occupying spouse should receive from the settlement. As Lady Justice King, giving the leading judgment of the Court of Appeal, pointed out, the only way that the wife could pay £600,000 would be from her lump sum, thereby reducing the lump sum by a “very significant sum”.

Clearly, whichever side you may be on, you will need to obtain the best possible legal advice. We can provide the advice you need, by finding you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

When deciding what, if any, financial orders to make on divorce the court is required to consider a checklist of factors. One of those factors is the contributions which each of the parties has made to the marriage.

Contributions can be financial, or they can be non-financial, such as looking after the home, or caring for the family. They can be both past contributions and future contributions.

In appropriate cases contributions can have a significant bearing upon the outcome of the case, where it would be unfair to disregard the fact that one party had made a much greater contribution than the other. This is most likely in high-money cases, as in low money cases the assets are usually required to pay for the financial needs of the parties, irrespective of who contributed what.

Contributions were a major factor in a recent Court of Appeal case. The case made the national news, as it involved a well-known BBC executive. She argued that she should have a greater share of the matrimonial assets, not just because of her substantial financial contribution towards the marriage, but also because, she claimed, her husband had made a negative financial contribution.

The case concerned her appeal against a financial award, which had already been amended in her favour following an earlier appeal.

Briefly, the circumstances of the case were that the parties were married in 1993 and have two children, twins, born in 2011. The husband is now aged 69 and the wife 57. The parties separated in 2012/2013 when the husband left the former matrimonial home. The husband has not sought to have any real contact with the children since the separation.

The wife has, for many years, worked for the BBC, and the husband has not worked for some time. The wife was earning a substantial sum, had some savings and a BBC pension worth some £2 million.

The husband, on the other hand, had a very small pension, and significant debts.

The parties also jointly owned a number of properties, with a net value of just over £2 million.

The wife argued that the husband’s contribution was “significantly negative”, and that the imbalance between the respective contributions of herself and the husband justified a significant departure from an equal division of assets. The court did not agree that the husband’s contribution was negative, but did find that it was “modest”. The wife was therefore awarded 63.5% of the non-pension assets. The pensions were shared equally.

The wife appealed. Her appeal was allowed, and her share of the assets was raised to 73%, and the husband’s share of the pensions was lowered to 34%.

The wife did not think that this went far enough and appealed again, to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It found, amongst other things, that the “negative contributions” argument was not actually about contributions at all, but rather about the husband’s conduct – contributions are positive, not negative. Here, the husband’s conduct was not sufficiently bad as to affect the financial settlement.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

Obviously, when a married couple separate one of them is likely to remain living in the former matrimonial home, even if just for a limited period.

But this of course means that the party who left will have their interest in the property tied up, with them receiving no benefit from it.

Wouldn’t it be fair if the party still enjoying occupation of the property should pay rent to the party who left?

The answer to that is: ‘perhaps’, as a recent case, which has made headlines in the national newspapers, demonstrates.

The case concerned a couple who had lived in a five-bedroomed house in Kensington, which was owned by the husband. The marriage broke down and the husband left the property in 2014.

In 2016 the couple agreed a divorce settlement, whereby the wife was to receive a settlement of £11.5 million. She received an initial £6.5 million and was due the balance when the house was sold. However, the sale was delayed in the difficult post-Brexit referendum property market, and did not take place until 2019.

The husband demanded that the wife, who continued to occupy the house until it was sold, pay him £600,000 in back-dated rent, at the rate of £5,000 per week. The wife refused, claiming that she had the right to live in the property rent-free, until it was sold.

The husband took the matter to the court and last year the High Court ruled in favour of the wife. The husband recently appealed against that decision to the Court of Appeal, which will give its decision at a later date.

The decision of the High Court may be thought to suggest that a spouse living in the former matrimonial home cannot be forced to pay occupational rent, as it is called, to the other spouse. However, that is not so.

It is quite possible for a divorce settlement to include an occupational rent provision. The point in this case is that the settlement did not include such a provision, and the husband argued that such a provision should be inferred. Obviously, the High Court did not agree.

It is also possible in certain circumstances for a court to order a spouse to vacate the matrimonial home, and then order that the other spouse should pay them an occupational rent, although such orders are quite rare.

Obviously, anyone considering claiming occupational rent from their (former) spouse should first seek the advice of an expert family lawyer. We can find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Café offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

It goes without saying that pensions are one of the most important assets on divorce. In fact, in many cases they are one of the most valuable assets, often second only to the former matrimonial home.

It is therefore essential that anyone going through divorce fully understands the issue of pension rights, and what they are entitled to.

But sadly not everyone does understand, with the result that many do not receive their full entitlement.

This applies especially to wives, as demonstrated recently by research undertaken on behalf of the pension provider Legal & General.

The research found that wives are significantly more likely to waive their rights to their husband’s pension as part of their divorce, with 28 per cent of wives doing this, compared to 19 per cent of husbands.

Legal & General rightly say that this could have a significant long-term impact upon wives, particularly as they tend to have less personal pension wealth.

According to the most recent findings from the Office for National Statistics, men currently below the State Pension age have higher (£25,300) median active pension wealth than women (£20,000), and for those aged 65 years and over, median pension wealth for pensions in payment for men is double that for women (£223,933 for men against £112,967 for women).

Unsurprisingly, the research showed that wives are more likely to face financial struggle post-divorce (31 per cent, against 21% of husbands), and worry about the impact on their retirement (16% per cent, against 10% of husbands).

These worrying figures indicate the vital importance of obtaining the best legal and financial advice regarding the issue of pensions on divorce. Clearly wives, especially those at or approaching retirement age, should not be disadvantaged in this way.

In particular, wives need to know the true financial effect of waiving their rights to their husband’s pension, rather than seeking a share of the pension. This is not a step that should be taken without proper advice.

*      *      *

All divorcing wives (and indeed husbands!) should seek expert legal and financial advice regarding pension rights. We can find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

The reader may have noticed in the news that the UK’s transition out of the European Union (‘EU’) was completed on the 31st of December (if not, where have you been?). What you may not realise, however, is that this has significant implications for any family law cases involving the EU.

Just to recap, the UK actually left the EU on the 31st of January 2020. However, there was then a transition period, during which the UK continued to abide by certain EU rules. The transition period ended on the 31st of December.

So what are the implications for family cases involving the EU? (Note that what follows relates only to cases involving the courts of England and Wales.)

There are two main sets of rules that apply to family cases in the EU. One, known as ‘Brussels II’, deals with jurisdiction and the cross-border recognition of judgments. The other, the Maintenance Regulation, sets out rules regarding maintenance cases.

Both sets of rules continued to apply to cases in England and Wales until the 31st of December, but have both now been revoked. This means that they do not apply to any cases starting after the 31st of December.

What does this actually mean? Well, there will be changes in the way it is decided what country’s courts should deal with divorce and children cases, and how court orders relating to such cases made in an EU country are recognised (or not) by the courts of this country. There will also be similar changes relating to maintenance cases, including the enforcement of maintenance orders made in another country.

The details of these changes are quite technical, and are beyond the scope of this post. The thing to take from all of this, though, is that if you are or may be concerned with a family case involving the EU then you really need to instruct an expert family lawyer, who can guide you through the changes. We can find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

Finally, it should be mentioned that the rules relating to international child abduction, and the return of abducted children, have not changed, as those rules are incorporated into our law. If your child has been abducted, or if you believe that they are at risk of being abducted, then you should instruct an expert family lawyer immediately – again, Family Law Cafe can help you find an expert.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

We have written here previously about the divorce of Tatiana Akhmedova, former wife of Farkhad Akhmedov, the Russian oligarch and ally of Russian president Vladimir Putin.

In 2016 Ms Akhmedova was awarded a divorce settlement of £453 million by Mr Justice Haddon-Cave in the High Court. It was, and remains, the largest ever divorce award by a court in this country.

Unfortunately, however, Mr Akhmedov has failed to pay the award, and Ms Akhmedova has therefore been endeavouring to enforce payment.

The case has now returned to court as part of those efforts to enforce the award. Ms Akhmedova alleges that Mr Akhmedov transferred cash and assets to their son Temur, in order to avoid paying her the money. Mr Arkmedov and Temur deny the allegation.

The allegations have led to a breach between Ms Akhmedova and Temur, who is reported to have said that he would “never be reconciled” with his mother because “her outrageous, revengeful behaviour” has destroyed their once close relationship.

The case may obviously be interesting to the general public because of the people and amounts of money involved, but can those of ‘ordinary’ means who are going through divorce learn anything from it?

They certainly can. There are at least two lessons that apply in most financial remedy cases.

The first lesson is that getting a financial award is not necessarily the end of the matter. In fact, it may be only half of the battle. An award is of no value if it is not paid, and all too often the party ordered to make payment fails to do so, necessitating enforcement action by the party to whom the award was made.

And enforcement action can be long and expensive, as this case demonstrates. In short, anyone seeking a financial award from the court on divorce should understand that getting an award is not necessarily the end of the matter, and should be prepared to ‘be in it for the long run’.

The other lesson is that long acrimonious divorces can destroy families, with children and other family members ‘taking sides’. As we have seen, this can cause irreparable damage to family relationships.

Now, there may not have been anything that Ms Akhmedova could have done to prevent the breach that has happened between herself and her son, but parties should certainly think very hard before they involve other family members, particularly children, in the proceedings.

And protecting the wider family, and especially any children, from becoming embroiled in an acrimonious dispute is just one of the many reasons why parties to divorce should make every reasonable effort to resolve the matter by agreement.

*      *      *

If you need to sort out financial arrangements on divorce then you should seek expert legal advice. We can find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

A remarkable case was published last month in which a 41 year-old man sought to make a claim for financial support from his parents. The claim failed, but the case raises the question: when can an adult child make a financial claim against their parents?

Normally of course financial claims for children are made on their behalf by a parent, whilst the child is still a minor, i.e. under 18. However, it is possible for an adult child to make a financial claim against their parents, albeit in very limited circumstances.

Note that this post does not refer to claims by an adult child against the estate of a deceased parent – such claims are not unusual. And nor does it refer to civil money claims by a child against a parent, such as debt claims.

So what ‘family law’ claims can a child make against their parent(s)?

Since 1993 child maintenance claims have of course usually been made under the Child Support Act. However, the Act only provides for child support maintenance claims to be made by a parent or carer of the child – it does not include provision for adult children to claim maintenance for themselves.

There are, however, ways in which an adult child can make financial claims against their parents. In summary, there are provisions under which they can claim maintenance or even a lump sum from either or both of their parents.

But there are limitations to such claims, depending upon what type of claim is being made. We will not go into detail, but two particular limitations apply in all cases: a court can only make an order against a parent if:

1. The child is, will be or (if an order were made) would be, receiving instruction at an educational establishment or undergoing training for a trade, profession or vocation, whether or not while they are in gainful employment; or

2. There are special circumstances which justify the making of an order. ‘Special circumstances’ is not defined, but it is generally thought to refer in particular to cases in which the adult child suffers from a disability. There may, of course, be other types of special circumstance, but it is likely to be very rare for a claim to be allowed on this basis.

In short, the law generally considers that a parent’s financial obligations towards their child cease when the child reaches the age of 18 or, if the child is then still financially dependent upon them, when the child is no longer dependent. The child will usually be no longer dependent when they finish education, unless they suffer from a disability, in which case the dependency could be for life.

*      *      *

If you are, or may be, involved in making an application for maintenance or financial provision for a child then you should seek expert legal advice. We can find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

Last week we looked at the procedure to be followed to get a financial remedy order, setting out the financial settlement on divorce. But getting the order is not necessarily the end of the matter.

The order must still be complied with. What if the other party does not comply with it? What can you do? After all, an order that cannot be enforced is not worth the paper it’s written on.

Well, there are various different ways of enforcing financial orders. Which one is appropriate will depend upon the particular situation.

Enforcing Maintenance Orders

Because of their continuing nature, maintenance orders present special problems when it comes to enforcement. Normally, the amount that the court will enforce is fixed at the date of enforcement, meaning any future non-payment will have to be enforced separately.

For this reason, the most appropriate method of enforcing a maintenance order is by applying for an attachment of earnings order, whereby the debtor’s employer is required to deduct the maintenance and a sum towards any arrears from the debtor’s salary, and pay that to the court, for onward payment to the creditor.

Obviously, attachment of earnings orders can only be made where the debtor is employed. If they are not, then another method of enforcement will have to be used – see below.

Enforcing Orders for Transfer or Sale of Property

It is not uncommon for a party to refuse to obey an order to transfer a property, usually the former matrimonial home, to the other party. In this case, or where the transferring party cannot be found, application may be made for an order that the conveyance or transfer be executed by a district judge, instead of the transferring party.

Where there is an order for sale of property, and one party refuses to cooperate with the sale by refusing to give up possession of the property, then an application may be made for an order that that party deliver up possession to the purchaser or to whomever the court directs, to allow the sale to proceed.

Other Forms of Enforcement

There are a number of other methods of enforcing a financial remedy order. Here are some of the most commonly used:

Third party debt order – An order directing a third party who owes money to the debtor (e.g. the debtor’s bank) to pay the debt directly to the creditor.

Charging order – An order of the court placing a charge on the debtor’s property, to the value of the debt. The debt is therefore secured, and can subsequently be recovered by seeking an order for the sale of the property.

Execution against goods – Requiring the court bailiff to attend the debtor’s premises and seize goods to the value of the sum due. The goods will be sold and the proceeds used to pay the debt.

Judgment summons – This is a procedure whereby the debtor is required to attend court, where he will be examined under oath as to his means and will have to explain why he should not be committed to prison for failure to comply with the order. In practice, any committal order is likely to be suspended on condition that the debtor pay the amount due by a specified date, or by specified instalments.

And finally, what if you don’t know what method of enforcement to use? Well, then you can make a general enforcement application, seeking ‘such method of enforcement as the court may consider appropriate’.

*      *      *

If you have a financial remedy order that you need to enforce then we would strongly recommend that you obtain the advice of an expert family lawyer. We find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Monty Allen on Unsplash

Last week we looked at the principles that the courts use to decide financial remedy applications on divorce. This week we will look at the procedure on such applications including, in particular, the Form E financial statement.

To keep things simple we will divide the procedure into five stages, although what actually happens in any particular case may differ.

Stage 1 – The Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (‘MIAM’).

Before issuing the application you may have to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting. As that name suggests, the primary purpose of the meeting is to assess whether the case is suitable for mediation. Some people are exempt from the requirement to attend a MIAM.

Stage 2 – The application (‘Form A’).

If the case does not go to mediation then the application will be made, by completing a ‘Form A’ and filing it with the court, with the requisite court fee.  The court will then fix a date for the First Directions Appointment (‘FDA’ – see below), and timetable certain actions that should be taken by the parties. In particular, not less than 35 days before the FDA each party must file with the court and serve upon the other party a Form E financial statement, more of which in a moment.

Stage 3 – The First Directions Appointment (‘FDA’).

Both parties will have to attend the FDA. The main purpose of the FDA is to ascertain what the issues between the parties are, and to decide how the case should proceed. The court will then give directions as to what should happen next, and when.

Stage 4 – The Financial Dispute Resolution appointment (‘FDR’).

The next stage in the proceedings is usually a Financial Dispute Resolution appointment, or ‘FDR’. At the FDR the parties will be expected to use their best endeavours to reach agreement on the issues between them, with the assistance of the judge. If agreement cannot be reached, then the court will fix a date for the final hearing.

Stage 5 – The final hearing.

A full hearing of the case, at the end of which the judge will make their decision, and a final order will be made.

Form E

The Form E financial statement is the most important document each party will have to prepare in the course of the proceedings. In it, they must disclose full details of their means, including their income, their savings and capital assets, their pensions and any debts they have. In addition, certain specified documentary evidence, such as bank statements, must be attached to the form. You can see a Form E here.

Each party has a duty to fully and truthfully complete the Form E, as without full and accurate information about the means of both parties, the court cannot make a decision. Obviously, the other party does not have to accept the contents of the form at face value. If they believe that full disclosure has not been made then they can request further information or documentation in a questionnaire, which they will prepare before the FDA. The court can order the party to whom the questionnaire is directed to provide replies.

*      *      *

If you are or may be involved in financial remedy proceedings then we would strongly recommend that you obtain the advice of an expert family lawyer. We find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Café offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Greg Rosenke on Unsplash

Last week we looked at the range of orders that the court can make when deciding a financial remedy claim on divorce. But how does the court decide what orders to make?

If all else is equal…

The starting-point in all cases is what is known as the ‘sharing principle’.

The sharing principle states that marriage is a partnership and that when the marriage ends each party is entitled to an equal share of the assets of the partnership, unless there is a good reason to the contrary.

The sharing principle will be the determining factor in many cases.

The next question, of course, is what is a ‘good reason to the contrary’?

Needs must

The most common reason is the needs of the parties, especially in cases where resources are limited.

The court will try to ensure that the basic needs of both parties (in particular income and housing needs) are met, and if one party has greater financial needs than the other then it may be appropriate for them to have a greater than half share of the assets.

A typical example of this is where dependent children live with just one of the parties. That party will obviously need to have suitable accommodation for the children, and their housing needs will therefore be greater than the housing needs of the other party.

Needs will also of course have a bearing upon whether a maintenance order is appropriate, and what pension sharing order, if any, should be made.

Note that needs are ‘generously interpreted’, meaning that they are calculated by reference to the resources available, and the standard of living enjoyed by the parties during the marriage – the needs of a party are not always the same in every case.

Anything else?

Well, yes. In fact, potentially any relevant circumstance of the case could have a bearing upon the court’s decision.

That’s not particularly helpful, so here are a few examples:

□ The income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources of the parties – obviously!

□ The ages of the parties – could be relevant, especially if one or both of the parties are approaching pension age.

□ The duration of the marriage – for example, after a very short marriage it may simply be appropriate to return the parties to the same financial position they were in before the marriage.

□ Each party’s contributions – where, for example, one party brought significantly more wealth into the marriage, that they had accumulated prior to the marriage.

□ The conduct of the parties – but before you start counting how much you think you should get, bear in mind that only the most serious conduct, such as threats to kill, is likely to have any bearing upon the financial settlement.

*      *      *

Once again, this is just a very brief introduction to a potentially very complex subject. If you are or may be involved in financial remedy proceedings then we would strongly recommend that you first obtain the advice of an expert family lawyer. We find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash