header-logo header-logo

07 March 2014 / Robert Micklem , Lucy Marks
Issue: 7597 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

The big bonus split

web_micklam_marks

How do the courts treat post-separation earnings? Robert Micklem & Lucy Marks report

It is not uncommon for one person in a divorce to earn a bonus between the date of separation and final settlement on divorce. With bonuses often forming a large part of the available family assets, many clients want to know how such sums will be treated by the court when it comes to deal with a final settlement.

 

Unsurprisingly, given the discretionary nature of the court, the answer is not straightforward, but the recent case of H v W [2013] EWHC 4105 (Fam), [2013] All ER (D) 249 (Dec) in which this firm acted for the husband, has provided some clarity.

Matrimonial or non-matrimonial property

Ideally a spouse in the midst of divorce proceedings would wish to claim that any money earned post-separation should be treated as non-matrimonial property and thereby should be ring-fenced from the divisible wealth. However, even non-matrimonial property can be made available for distribution.

In N v F (Financial Order: Pre Acquired

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll