TM v AM [2023] EWFC 247 (B) (08 November 2023)

TM v AM [2023] EWFC 247 (B) (08 November 2023)

There was no direct or circumstantial evidence that the wife owned or benefitted from the diamond, nor was there material non-disclosure or fraud. Any discrepancies in asset schedules were minor and inconsequential. The husband consented to the order, which was generous to him. The application to set aside the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] EWFC 247 (B)
Parties
Applicant/husband: TM; Respondent/wife: AM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Financial Remedy Consent Order / Final Hearing, Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Financial Remedies, Consent Orders, Material Non Disclosure, Fraud, Disclosure Obligations, Burden of Proof
Family Law Financial Remedies Consent Orders Material Non Disclosure Fraud Disclosure Obligations Burden of Proof

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TM

Applicant/husband

AM

Respondent/wife

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Financial Remedy Consent Order / Final Hearing, Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the wife failed to disclose ownership of a valuable diamond and procured the consent order by material non-disclosure or fraud
  2. 2 Whether the wife's solicitors submitted amended asset figures to the court without consulting or informing the husband
  3. 3 Whether any consequential directions or orders for costs should follow

Ratio Decidendi

There was no direct or circumstantial evidence that the wife owned or benefitted from the diamond, nor was there material non-disclosure or fraud. Any discrepancies in asset schedules were minor and inconsequential. The husband consented to the order, which was generous to him. The application to set aside the consent order is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Husband's application to set aside the consent order is dismissed
  • Costs to be addressed separately