header-logo header-logo

13 May 2010 / Geraldine Morris
Issue: 7417 / Categories: Features , Divorce , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Bones of contention

Geraldine Morris reports on funding former spouses & hypothetical claims

Practitioner’s will be familiar with the scenario where a second spouse or partner is a bone of contention for a first spouse within financial proceedings. This issue has been considered previously by the courts, most notably in the following cases:
 

  • Roberts v Roberts [1968] 3 All ER 479 in which it was held, inter alia, that “a spouse must on marriage be presumed…to take the other subject to all existing encumbrances, whether known or not, eg…an obligation to support the wife or child of a dissolved marriage”.
  • Blower v Blower [1986] 1 FLR 292 where it was held that obligations to second spouses are a matter for the court’s discretion.
  • Delaney v Delaney [1990] 2 FLR 457 where it was emphasised that the moral obligations to a later spouse or partner or child cannot be disregarded by the court in determining financial obligations.

The facts in Vaughan v Vaughan [2010] EWCA Civ 349, [2010] All ER (D) 04 (Apr) are relatively

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll