Meal ticket for life?

06 September 2018 / David Burrows

Issue: 7807 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family

David Burrows examines the decision in Mills v Mills & what it means for maintenance for a dependent spouse

To what extent should a court duplicate a periodical payments liability for a spouse who has mismanaged her finances?
When should the court consider capitalisation of periodical payments?
To what extent should an appellate court interfere with the statutory discretion of a first instance judge?

The recent ‘meal ticket for life’ Supreme Court case of Mills v Mills [2018] UKSC 38, [2018] All ER (D) 107 (Jul) (18 July 2018) operates on three levels:

variation of periodical payments (‘meal ticket for life’);
capitalisation of periodical payments; and (hovering in the background); and
the extent of an appellate court’s interference with a first instance judge (in this case His Honour Judge Mark Everall QC sitting in the Central Family Court).

The Supreme Court appeal related to the application of Mrs Mills (W) to vary periodical payments which had been part of a consent order made in 2002; and the application of Mr Mills

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

Meal ticket for life?

David Burrows examines the decision in Mills v Mills & what it means for maintenance for a dependent spouse

To what extent should a court duplicate a periodical payments liability for a spouse who has mismanaged her finances?
When should the court consider capitalisation of periodical payments?
To what extent should an appellate court interfere with the statutory discretion of a first instance judge?

The recent ‘meal ticket for life’ Supreme Court case of Mills v Mills [2018] UKSC 38, [2018] All ER (D) 107 (Jul) (18 July 2018) operates on three levels:

variation of periodical payments (‘meal ticket for life’);
capitalisation of periodical payments; and (hovering in the background); and
the extent of an appellate court’s interference with a first instance judge (in this case His Honour Judge Mark Everall QC sitting in the Central Family Court).

The Supreme Court appeal related to the application of Mrs Mills (W) to vary periodical payments which had been part of a consent order made in 2002; and the application of Mr Mills

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk

Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'

NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law

In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains

NLJ this week: Trauma-informed pro bono

In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work

NLJ this week: When leases last hours

Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: EU law trumps sports arbitration

RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich

Error message

Meal ticket for life?

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith