header-logo header-logo

22 March 2013 / Edward Heaton
Issue: 7553 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Down & out

istock_000012267319medium_0

What impact does bankruptcy have on a lump sum order obligation, asks Edward Heaton

In McRoberts v McRoberts [2012] EWHC 2966 (Ch), [2012] All ER (D) 12 (Nov), Hildyard J, in the Chancery Division, considered the impact of bankruptcy on a husband’s obligation to meet a lump sum order.

Background

The parties entered into a financial agreement in 2003, the terms of which were recorded in a consent order dated 1 April 2003. Among other things, the consent order provided for the husband, who was the applicant in the proceedings before Hildyard J, to make a lump sum payment of £450,000 to the wife, who was the respondent. The lump sum was stated to be payable by instalments, the final instalment to be paid by 31 March 2009. Interest was to accrue on any late payments and the entirety of the remaining balance of the lump sum outstanding was to fall due in the event of any payment becoming more than 14 days overdue.

The husband failed to make the payments that

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: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Global finance group strengthened by returning partner in London

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll