header-logo header-logo

07 June 2007
Issue: 7276 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Divorce—Financial provision—Matters to be considered by court when making order

Charman v Charman [2007] EWCA Civ 503, [2007] All ER (D) 425 (May)

Court of Appeal, Civil Division

Sir Mark Potter P, Thorpe and Wilson LJJ

24 May 2007

Determination of whether there should be any “special contribution” by one party under s 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) takes place within the statutory exercise. The “sharing principle” applies to all the parties’ property but, to the extent that their property is non-matrimonial, there is likely to be better reason for departure from equality.

Barry Singleton QC, Alan Boyle QC, Deborah Eaton, Deepak Nagpal and Dakis Hagen (instructed by Withers LLP) for the husband.
Martin Pointer QC, Christopher Nugee QC, James Ewins and Andrew Mold (instructed by Manches LLP) for the wife.

The parties married in 1976. To the marriage they brought their earning capacities but at that time they had in effect no capital assets. They had two children. Considerable assets were earned by the husband during the marriage. In 2004 the wife issued

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

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll