header-logo header-logo

01 February 2007 / David Burrows
Issue: 7258 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

finance on family breakdown

EQUITABLE PRINCIPLES IN FAMILY PROCEEDINGS

In S v S (M Intervening) [2006] EWHC 2892 (Fam), [2006] All ER (D) 229 (Nov) the wife (W) had retained the former matrimonial home (the property) upon the parties’ divorce in 1989. The husband (H) had a charge-back of one-third realisable when the children ceased to be dependent, W remarried or cohabited permanently or she died—standard Mesher terms. H was required to pay periodical payments for W and the children. In 1993, said W, H agreed to remit his charge on the property if W agreed to forego her entitlement to the arrears then due and to any future payments.

 In 1995 W’s mother (M) moved to and then bought a half-share in the property; but on the assumption of both W and M that H no longer had any charge on, nor other interest in, the property. M said she and H had had separate discussions on the subject. H had not registered his charge with Land Registry. W and M’s agreement was not formalised in

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll