W v W [2003] EWHC 2254 (Fam) (9 October 2003)

W v W [2003] EWHC 2254 (Fam) (9 October 2003)

The husband's Form E was deliberately false and misrepresented his financial position by including improbable contingent liabilities as hard debts and omitting significant assets. The court must capitalise the wife's maintenance at a level reflecting her reasonable needs and life expectancy, using a Duxbury calculation at a lower rate to provide greater security, and order the husband to pay a lump sum accordingly. The husband's litigation misconduct justifies a costs order against him.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 2254 (Fam)
Parties
Petitioner (wife): W; Respondent (husband): W
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief / Variation of Periodical Payments Order (family) / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Application granted in part; periodical payments order varied and capitalised; costs order against husband.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Variation of Periodical Payments, Capitalisation of Maintenance, Disclosure Obligations, Form E Misrepresentation, Costs
Family Law Ancillary Relief Variation of Periodical Payments Capitalisation of Maintenance Disclosure Obligations Form E Misrepresentation Costs

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W

Petitioner (wife)

W

Respondent (husband)

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief / Variation of Periodical Payments Order (family) / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the husband's Form E was deliberately false and misrepresentative
  2. 2 Whether contingent liabilities were properly included as hard debts
  3. 3 Appropriate capitalisation of periodical payments order for the wife

Ratio Decidendi

The husband's Form E was deliberately false and misrepresented his financial position by including improbable contingent liabilities as hard debts and omitting significant assets. The court must capitalise the wife's maintenance at a level reflecting her reasonable needs and life expectancy, using a Duxbury calculation at a lower rate to provide greater security, and order the husband to pay a lump sum accordingly. The husband's litigation misconduct justifies a costs order against him.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; periodical payments order varied and capitalised; costs order against husband.

Orders

  • Existing periodical payments order varied to £34,000 per annum net, backdated to 7 December 2001.
  • Order capitalising maintenance at £560,000 lump sum, payable by 1 October 2003.