June 22th, 2018
The Court of Appeal has made Judgment on a case which gives guidance on the application of the sharing principle, earning capacity, and the compensation principle.
The case concerned a married couple who lived together since 1991, married in 2000 and then separated in 2012. They had one child who was born in 2004. At first, the parties agreed their capital and pension provisions should be split 50/50 but were unable to agree on maintenance.
At the Final Hearing the Judge provided a draft Judgment which was later amended. The wife received £8.4 million and the husband received £7.8 million. The wife also received just shy of a further £1.4 million comprising of differing percentages of deferred remuneration received by the husband after separation. In addition, the wife was awarded maintenance on a joint lives basis. The maintenance was calculated by considering the shortfall between what the wife’s income needs were and what she could earn from her “spare capital” in terms of interest. The rate of interest applied to the capital was 1.75%. The court considered that the wife could not adjust without undue hardship if maintenance were to be terminated.
The husband cross-appealed. He argued that the Judge at first instance failed to give enough weight to the clean break principle enshrined in the Matrimonial Causes Act. He argued that the wife could adjust without undue hardship and that she should not be entitled to joint lives maintenance.
Judgment was given and guidance was provided as follows: -
The outcome was therefore amended so that the wife’s maintenance term ends in March 2021 and a section 28(1A) Bar was also ordered as the court considered it was not unreasonable for the wife to rely on her capital to meet her needs.
This case is incredibly important. It gives parties clear Court of Appeal guidance on how the sharing principle should be applied and confirms that earning capacity is not a matrimonial asset that is subject to the principle of sharing. It puts the clean break principle back where the legislators intended, at the heart of financial resolution, and also sends a clear message that, just because the sharing principle applies in relation to capital matrimonial acquest, does not mean the same is true of income. Furthermore, it actually confronts reality. In cases where there are such significant capital resources, to ignore the income generating potential of the capital assets is to ignore a resource available to that party.
If you are amidst divorce proceedings and what any more information/advice on how the court decides how the matrimonial assets should be divided between two separating spouses, then please do give one of our solicitors a call on 01908 262680;
Having obtained her A Levels from the Royal Latin School in Buckingham, Rebecca Stewart went on to obtain a Legal Secretary Diploma through Pitmans Training and immediately following qualification secured a role at Hawkins Family Law. Following that she discovered her true ambition lay in becoming a Legal Executive specialising in Family Law.In 2012 Rebecca enrolled at Cilex Law School and by 2015 had completed all her level 3 exams, achieving distinctions in 3 of these modules, and is now an Associate Member of Cilex. Rebecca is now working towards her level 6 qualifications and is now able to act as a trainee Legal Executive under the supervision of the Directors of Hawkins Family Law.
Hawkins Family Law is ‘an excellent family firm which goes the extra mile for its clients’, and the team is praised for its ‘well-honed communication skills and insightful advice’. Key areas of focus include high-value financial matters and divorce cases, and the recent arrival of Stacey St Clair has brought significant cross-border, international relocation and child abduction expertise to the group. Practice head Jo Hawkins is ‘an immensely good judge of character’ and ‘litigates firmly but fairly’. The other key figure is Loraine Davenport, who focuses on high net-worth ancillary relief.
For further information click here.
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. 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 “This is a boutique family law firm that goes the extra mile for their clients,” an interviewee affirms. The team is also praised for its meticulous approach, with clients saying: “They really fight for you. They are very thorough; there are no slip-ups”.
For more information please click here.