header-logo header-logo

06 June 2013 / Edward Heaton , Anna Heenan
Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Scuppering unscrupulous spouses

istock_000007711731medium

What are the implications of a court setting aside a disposal made by a divorcing spouse to a third party? Anna Heenan & Ed Heaton report

It is not uncommon on divorce for people’s thoughts to turn to limiting their spouse’s financial claim. For the unscrupulous, this can go a step further with people “disposing” of assets to try and put them beyond their spouse’s reach. While the courts have a wide discretion under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) to redistribute assets between the parties on divorce, matters are inevitably more complicated when the assets in question are held by parties outside the marriage.

In the recent case of AC v DC (No 1) [2012] EWHC 2032 (Fam), the court had to consider the extent to which it was appropriate to invoke its power under s 37 of MCA 1973 to order the setting aside of a disposal made by one of the parties to the marriage to a third party in the form of an offshore corporate trustee.

Background

After

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll