LinkedIn   Twitter   Facebook   Instagram  
[title]

Get In
Touch

Open Mon - Fri
8:30 am to 5:00 pm

enquiries@hawkinsfamilylaw.co.uk

Stony Stratford: 01908 262680
Bicester: 01869 225580

RAMBLINGS  |  CAREERS  |  FEEDBACK  |  READING TITLES  |  USEFUL INFORMATION

Conduct in Financial Proceedings & The Notorious "Add-Back" Argument

May 18th, 2018

 

A persistent issue in Family Law is whether a Court should ‘judge’ divorcing couples who come before them in relation to the way in which they have behaved during their marriage. Whereas the Court should not be seen to cast judgement, there are some occasions where it would appear more unfair not to do so. It is not difficult to imagine the scenario where a husband or a wife, faced with an impending divorce, spends extreme amounts of money in an attempt to reduce the ‘pot’ of finances which could be awarded to their former spouse. The question is, should this be taken into account by a judge when making a financial order? Should a party who has behaved reprehensibly be given a reduced award accordingly? This has been a contentious issue for the Courts.

S25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act (MCA) 1973 sets out the factors which a Court should take into consideration when deciding how to split the matrimonial assets. S25(2)(g) states; ‘the conduct of each of the parties, if that conduct is such that in the opinion of the court it would be inequitable to disregard it’. Usually, after making provision for each party’s needs, the Court will divide the remaining finances equally, however, weight will be attached to any conduct which is ‘both gross and obvious’,[1] thus ensuring the overarching principle of fairness is upheld. When making this assessment, a distinction is drawn between a person’s conduct in a financial and non-financial sense.

General Conduct

For non-finance related conduct, notoriously, those citing adultery as the fact which caused the irretrievable breakdown of their marriage (s1(2)(a) MCA) once would have had this taken into account. Traditionally, the adulterer was given a reduced financial award with regard to this section; the justification being the sanctity of marriage which must be preserved. Thus, Courts would reduce the awards granted with the intention of deterring other potential adulterers.

These days there is a much higher threshold and, to affect an award, a person’s general conduct must be shocking. Cases where the award has been reduced are very rare and usually confined to their own facts. In one, a wife wished to inherit her husband’s entire estate so that she could move her new lover in. The husband was severely depressed and she assisted him in committing suicide. The suicide attempt was unsuccessful, but her award on divorce was significantly reduced due to her heinous actions.[2]

In another case, the husband attacked his wife with knives in front of their children - for which he was sent to prison. The Court took into account this conduct when dividing the finances, of which his award was then reduced.[3]

On the other hand, the type of general conduct which may be considered is not always negative, and good conduct can increase an award just as bad conduct can reduce one. In A v A (Financial Provision: Conduct),[4] the husband gave up his job and made no effort, however the wife worked hard in the evenings whilst undertaking a University degree. The Court considered their respective conduct and awarded the wife a greater amount.

Financial Conduct

Financial conduct is a different matter. On rare occasions a Court may, after making provision for the needs of the respective parties, consider financial misconduct where one spouse has dissipated the assets for example by gambling, purchasing expensive goods or services or investing money irresponsibly. In these cases, there is an option available to the Court to ‘add-back’ those spent finances, treating them as though they were still held by the party. This, nevertheless, is not an easy argument to succeed with.

The difficulty can clearly be seen with the recent cases of Rapp v Sarre [2016] EWCA Civ 93 and MAP v MFP [2015] EWHC 6275. In Rapp, the husband had spent a significant portion of the matrimonial finances on his involvement with drugs and prostitution immediately before the divorce proceedings. The Court ultimately split the finances, awarding more to the wife, on the grounds of her needs but commented that, had her needs not required more, the husbands conduct would have led them to make the same departure from equal division.

Contrarily, in MAP, the wife’s argument for a £1.5 million add-back, being the amount she put forward as the husband’s expenditure on credit cards, drugs, a stay in a drug rehabilitation centre and on prostitution, was rejected by the Judge. Interestingly, Moor J, although finding that the husband had overspent significantly, found that the monies spent were not wanton and so could not be added back; conversely, they were simply part of the husband’s flawed character and, as such, a spouse must take their partner as they find them. In this way, unless spending is reckless and carried out with the intention of maliciously reducing the matrimonial pot, it cannot form part of an add-back argument.

Overall, this is clearly not a cut and dry issue. On the one hand, fairness dictates that the finances should be divided equally after needs have been met whereas, on the other, allowing a former husband or wife to recklessly spend their money so as to reduce the financial reward for the other party sets a worrying precedent and is certainly not fair for the spouse who has behaved reasonably. Malicious frittering away of finances, however, may only occur in the most bitter of divorces, as spending the matrimonial money is clearly a double edged sword in that the spending party will also lose some of what they could have been awarded.

At Hawkins Family Law, we always advise our clients to be fully cooperative in the Court process; to act reasonably and help prevent any further tension in a situation which we understand may already be extremely challenging. To take your first steps towards specialist advice, give us a call on 01908 262 680 or email enquiries@hawkinsfamilylaw.co.uk

 


 

Written by

Holly Mullen

PA

Having recently graduated with her first class honours degree in law from the University of Bedfordshire, Holly is keen to explore her interest in Family Law. She has previously volunteered with public legal advice services and hopes to eventually qualify as a family Solicitor. Holly joined Hawkins Family Law in August 2017.

  • What Is Chambers and Partners?
  • Service Of Key Court Papers By Whatsapp
  • Is Therapy for Me?
  • What Constitutes Value?
  • F v M (Temporary Leave to Remove: Alleged Risk of Onward Abduction to Non-Hague Country)
  • Can Assets of a Parent Be Taken into Account in a CMS Calculation?
  • What is the HSSF Mark?
  • Wife’s Attempt to Appeal Arbitration Award Fails!
  • Shared Care Orders
  • Mental Health Awareness Week 2019
  • What Happens If I Make an Agreement Regarding Finances and Then Change My Mind?
  • Spousal Maintenance on Divorce – Is There A Claim?
  • Daga v Bangur [2018] EWFC 91 – Case Update
  • Common Law Marriage Is Not Changing!
  • Whose Outcome Is It?
  • In the Event of A ‘No Deal’ Brexit
  • What Constitutes Value?
  • What Is Legal 500?
  • Spring Clean your Routine
  • Mother Ordered to Return Child to Latvia
  • What Is ‘Chambers and Partners UK’?
  • Arbitration. A viable alternative?
  • Strive for stability in 2019
  • What Happens If I Make an Agreement Regarding Finances and Then Change My Mind?
  • Stacey Accredited by Resolution
  • Can Financial Claims Still Be Made Years After Divorce?
  • What Is the Difference Between A Court Order and An Undertaking?
  • Divorce or Annulment?
  • Therapy - A New Year’s resolution.
  • Cohabitation and the need for reform
  • The “Common Law Marriage myth”
  • What to think about when you are considering divorce from a financial perspective
  • Increase in IVF and Surrogacy Leads to A Decrease in Adoption Rates
  • Looking After Yourself
  • Transparency in the Family Courts
  • The Legal 500 rankings for 2018/19
  • Forced Marriage
  • What can therapy help with?
  • Chambers and Partners Ranking Released
  • Does Divorce Law Encourage Couples to Reconcile?
  • What is Resolution?
  • Asserting yourself or saying no.
  • Is Bigger Always Better?
  • McKenzie Friend
  • Prioritising Your Children’s Needs in Adverse Circumstances
  • What do I need to know if I decide to cohabit with someone?
  • High Court Judge ‘Deprecates’ Interrupting Barristers
  • Prohibited Steps Orders
  • Domestic abuse in all its forms is unacceptable
  • The Five Facts for obtaining a Divorce Part 2
  • The Five Facts for Obtaining a Divorce: Behaviour/Adultery
  • Remember and recover... Forgive and forget... - August 3rd, 2018
  • Case Law Update – Hermens v Hermans - 27th July 2018
  • Finding summer happiness July 24th 2018
  • The first women to be convicted of coercive behaviour
  • New Starter
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the 'rise of the machines'.
  • Let's remove fault based divorce - July 6th, 2018
  • Honesty really is the best policy - June 29th, 2018
  • Heterosexual Couples win right to enter into Civil Partnerships - June 27th, 2018
  • Waggott v Waggott [2018] EWCA Civ 727 - June 22th, 2018
  • Privacy and confidentiality - June 15th, 2018
  • The ongoing Russian oligarch saga - June 8th, 2018
  • Being a Trainee Solicitor - June 1st, 2018
  • 83 year old millionaire jailed for non-compliance with divorce order
  • Conduct in Financial Proceedings & The Notorious "Add-Back" Argument - May 18th, 2018
  • Mental Health Week - 14th to 20th May 2018 - May 11th, 2018
  • What can we do so I can win? - May 4th, 2018
  • New measures designed to tackle domestic abuse - April 27th, 2018
  • Can I stop the other parent of my child making an application to the court?
  • Cryptocurrencies and divorce - April 13th, 2018
  • April 6th 2018 - Spring
  • How to sleep - March 29th, 2018
  • First surrogacy guidance published for England and Wales - March 23rd, 2018
  • Feminism in Family Law Part 2 – Parents and Children - March 9th, 2018
  • Feminism in Family Law Part 1 - Ancillary Relief - March 2nd, 2018
  • Chambers & Partners - February 23rd, 2018
  • Google Depression - February 16th, 2018
  • What is a Fact-Finding Hearing? - Feburary 9th, 2018
  • Moving Forward - Feburary 2nd, 2018
  • Parental Alienation - January 26th, 2018
  • Financing a property after divorce or separation – January 19th, 2018
  • Ideas to help buy a property after divorce or separation - January 12th, 2018
  • New Year 2018 - January 5th, 2018
  • The First Step - December 29th, 2017
  • Have a considered Christmas 2017 - December 22nd, 2017
  • Who is looking after you? - December 15th, 2017
  • What is the legal 500 - December 8th, 2017
  • When the clocks go back - December 1st, 2017
  • You are the Priority - November 17th, 2017
  • Hawkins Family Law ‘Boutique family law firm that punches above its weight’ as noted by Chambers and Partners UK Guide, 2018
  • Husband installs secret cameras to record abuse from wife - November 24th, 2017
  • My spouse owns the family home - what can I do to protect my interest? Can I still live there until the divorce is finalised? - November 10th, 2017
  • Division of assets following divorce - November 3rd, 2017
  • My marriage has broken down - what do I need to do? - October 27th, 2017
  • Identifying your emotions to create change - October 20th, 2017
  • Jo Hawkins is listed in elite “ Leading Lawyers” list by The Legal 500 United Kingdom, 2017’s guide to outstanding lawyers nationwide - October 12th, 2017
  • New divorce forms unveiled - October 6th, 2017
  • Judge writes personal letter to teen after High Court battle - September 29th, 2017
  • Mental Health Saboteurs - September 22nd, 2017
  • Birch V Birch - September 8th, 2017
  • Congratulations, Rebecca Stewart passes her CILEx Level 6 in Client Care!
  • Resolution emphasises the need for more specialist financial advisers - August 25th, 2017
  • ONS - Population estimates for the proportion who are married or cohabiting by reference to age and sex in E & W
  • Court of Appeal rule forging contact order cannot be enforced - August 11th, 2017
  • Understanding loss as part of divorce - August 4th, 2017
  • Summary Case Law Update: X v X (application for a financial remedies order) [2016] EWHC 1995 (Fam)
  • Stacey accredited by Resolution - July 21st, 2017
  • Australian Divorce - Court of Appeal reject wife's bid for a larger settlement - July 14th, 2017
  • Just have a day - July 7th, 2017
  • Stuck in my marriage - June 30th, 2017
  • Emergency - a without notice injunctive order - June 23rd, 2017
  • Case law update concerning a mother’s application to relocate to the USA - June 16th, 2017
  • Reconciling as parents - June 9th, 2017
  • Stacey passes Collaborative Foundation training!
  • Life changing circumstances - May 26th, 2017
  • Bank of mum and dad - May 19th, 2017
  • Giving Evidence in a Children Act Case - May 12th, 2017
  • Are you more likely to divorce if you confide in female friends? - May 5th, 2017
  • Respond - do not react! - April 28th, 2017
  • Student loans - April 24th, 2017
  • Identity or not identity - April 20th, 2017
  • I don’t agree with what my spouse has said about me on his/ her divorce petition- Should I defend it?
  • Are judges the same as the rest of us? - March 31st, 2017
  • Domestic violence and child contact - can these work together?- March 24th, 2017
  • Child Arbitration- March 17th, 2017
  • A Step in the right direction for Cohabitees- March 3rd, 2017
  • Blue Monday- March 3rd, 2017
  • Blog on Matrimonial Survey Statistics - February 24th, 2017
  • What is it like to go to family court?- February 17th, 2017
  • Funding - February 10th, 2017
  • December 2016 - December 16th, 2016
  • Twas the night before Christmas… - December 23rd, 2016
  • Online Divorce Proceedings - January 20th, 2017
  • Case Law Update Concerning Overseas Pensions - January 13th, 2017
  • Make one resolution for 2017. Be Kind to Yourself - January 6th, 2017
  • Social Media in Divorce - December 2nd, 2016
  • Planning for Christmas following divorce or separation - December 9th, 2016
  • Should graduates be used to help Litigants in Person - December 30th, 2016
  • Talk To One Of Our Legal Experts

    01908 262680

    enquiries@hawkinsfamilylaw.co.uk

    enquiries@hawkinsfamilylaw.co.uk

    Talk To One Of Our Legal Experts

    01908 262680

    enquiries@hawkinsfamilylaw.co.uk

    enquiries@hawkinsfamilylaw.co.uk

    2019 Family: Beds, Bucks, Herts and Middx – South East

    Hawkins Family Law fields 'a very professional team that delivers a high-class service and has strength-in-depth from senior to junior level'. Managing director and team head Jo Hawkins provides 'clear and accurate advice and moral support through often testing times for her clients; she focuses on deriving the best long-term outcome for her client and other parties'. The practice has particular strength financial matters, including divorce and ToLATA proceedings. Other key figures include Loraine Davenport, who has strong collaborative law expertise and handles complex children cases and high-net-worth ancillary relief matters; Annabel Hayward, who focuses on complex financial provision and co-habitation matters; and Stacey St Clair.

    For more information please click here.

    2019 Family/Matrimonial – Milton Keynes and surrounds

    What the team is known for
    Boutique family law firm that punches above its weight in terms of high-value and complex matrimonial finance instructions relating to business assets, pensions and substantial property portfolios, including assisting with the handling of assets abroad. Also represents clients in the negotiation of wealth protection agreements and private law childcare arrangements. Fields a team trained in collaborative law and alternative dispute resolution.

    Strengths
    An impressed client says: "The team's personal service and individual care is a great asset,"adding that the lawyers are "always available to assist and understand the occasional need for immediate advice and guidance, providing a very reassuring service."

    For more information please click here.