The court proposed a settlement range between two figures for the wife, suggesting that this would be a fair compromise. A draft order was prepared following the hearing, and the husband expressed satisfaction with the outcome.
This case involved financial remedy proceedings following the breakdown of a marriage. The main issues revolved around the valuation and ownership of the former matrimonial home (FMH), the wife’s mortgage capacity, and the husband’s mother’s potential interest in the property.
The court expressed concerns over the lack of financial disclosure from both parties. The wife was criticized for not providing up-to-date financial documents, such as her pension valuation and mortgage capacity. The husband was also faulted for not being clear about his mother’s potential interest in the FMH, although he argued that this issue had been addressed earlier in the proceedings.
During the hearing, the judge criticized the wife’s demand for an unreasonable financial settlement, stating that it was highly unusual for one party to request such a high percentage of the assets, leaving the other with negative equity.
The court ultimately concluded that the likely equity in the FMH ranged between two figures, with the wife’s mortgage capacity remaining unclear due to a lack of evidence. The court suggested that if the wife could secure a mortgage, she might be able to purchase a new home with a contribution from the FMH.
The judge also addressed the husband’s business, noting that while it was likely of some value, a formal valuation would not be proportionate given the circumstances.
This case illustrates the court’s focus on achieving a balanced and fair financial outcome in matrimonial disputes, emphasizing the importance of proper financial disclosure by both parties.
For more information, please visit Anvil Chambers or contact us at clerks@anvilchambers.co.uk.