header-logo header-logo

04 June 2020 / Stacey Nevin
Issue: 7889 / Categories: Features , Family , Divorce
printer mail-detail

High earners & sacrificed careers

22068
Stacey Nevin reports on the nuances of a successful appeal for ‘relationship generated disadvantage’
  • Looks at RC v JC, where the wife claimed for relationship generated disadvantage.
  • Claims for compensation are loss-related not needs-related.

In the recently reported case of RC v JC [2020] EWHC 466 (Fam), the respondent wife successfully pursued a claim for compensation for her ‘relationship generated disadvantage’. Giving judgment, Mr Justice Moor accepted ‘that it is unusual to find significant relationship generated disadvantage that may lead to compensation’ but was ‘clear that this is one such case’.

 

Principle of compensation

 

The principle of compensation was firmly established and last successfully used in the 2006 case of Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24. Since then, there have been no reported cases where the principle has been argued successfully, until RC v JC.

In McFarlane, the House of Lords identified three principles to guide the court when trying to achieve a fair outcome for the parties: needs (generously

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