The court also granted Emma Villiers permission to bring a claim for a lump sum at a later stage, in Villiers v Villiers [2022] EWCA Civ 772, handed down last week.
The husband was originally ordered to pay her £2,500 per month in 2015 but has paid nothing, instead pursuing a legal challenge on jurisdiction―whether Scots law or English law should apply since she started divorce proceedings in England in 2013, and he started divorce proceedings in Scotland in 2014―through to the Supreme Court in 2020 (as well as making an unfounded allegation of bigamy).
Jane Mitchell, partner at Penningtons Manches Cooper, who acted for Mrs Villiers, said: ‘Section 27 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, under which this application was made, is a relatively little used but important provision, under which a spouse can apply for an order on the ground that the other party to the marriage has failed to provide reasonable maintenance for them.
‘Our client is also pleased the Court of Appeal have highlighted their concern that the husband in this long-running case is in serial contempt of court, and that a litigant who has conducted a case as he has done should not be allowed to profit from “forensic cheating”.’
Mitchell said the judgment was ‘of great importance for the weaker financial party in such circumstances’ as it clarified two matters. First, ‘the court is not restricted to looking solely at the level of financial support prior to the date of the application. It is the date of the hearing which is the relevant date, and the court must take into account all the circumstances of the case’. Second, an order for maintenance under s 27 ‘does not automatically terminate upon the ending of the marriage, contrary to the suggestion of the judge at first instance. It can be expressed, as the Court of Appeal has expressed it to be here, until further order or until the recipient’s remarriage’.
