Heyer v Newby

Heyer v Newby

The judge's finding that the wife did not have sufficient information to justify an earlier application was open to her on the facts. The husband's failure to provide disclosure magnified his obligation, especially given the ongoing periodical payments order. The delay by the wife was not such as to disentitle her to relief. The costs order was within the judge's discretion and justified by the wife's success on the preliminary issue.

Parties
Petitioner/respondent: Huibertje-Gerharda Den Heyer (formerly Newby); Respondent/appellant: Leonard John Newby
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family/ancillary Relief) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Family Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; applications refused
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Consent Orders, Non Disclosure, Variation of Periodical Payments, Delay in Application
Family Law Ancillary Relief Consent Orders Non Disclosure Variation of Periodical Payments Delay in Application

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Huibertje-Gerharda Den Heyer (formerly Newby)

Petitioner/respondent

Leonard John Newby

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family/ancillary Relief) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Family Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the consent order should be set aside for material non-disclosure by the husband
  2. 2 Whether the wife's delay in applying to set aside the order disentitled her to relief
  3. 3 Appropriate approach to costs in ancillary relief applications

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's finding that the wife did not have sufficient information to justify an earlier application was open to her on the facts. The husband's failure to provide disclosure magnified his obligation, especially given the ongoing periodical payments order. The delay by the wife was not such as to disentitle her to relief. The costs order was within the judge's discretion and justified by the wife's success on the preliminary issue.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; applications refused

Orders

  • Application to set aside consent order upheld; consent order set aside for material non-disclosure
  • Husband to pay wife's costs of and relating to her application to set aside the consent order, on the standard basis, with a substantial proportion on account