header-logo header-logo

The big bonus split

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll