Gowers v Gowers

Gowers v Gowers

The court had no jurisdiction to order payment of the £500,000 held in court to the wife because the husband had no beneficial interest in the company assets, there was no basis for piercing the corporate veil in the absence of impropriety, and the payment into court did not create an entitlement for the wife. Paragraph 2 of the order was made without power or jurisdiction and must be set aside.

Parties
Applicant/wife: Nova Karen Gowers; Respondent/husband: Benjamin Daniel Gowers; Intervener/third Party: City Docs Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial/family (financial Remedy) / Application to Set Aside Order; Preliminary Issues Determination
Outcome
Application granted; paragraph 2 of the order set aside; payment out to City Docs Limited ordered.
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Finance, Corporate Veil, Jurisdiction of Family Court, Third Party Assets, Freezing Orders
Family Law Company Law Matrimonial Finance Corporate Veil Jurisdiction of Family Court Third Party Assets Freezing Orders

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nova Karen Gowers

Applicant/wife

Benjamin Daniel Gowers

Respondent/husband

City Docs Limited

Intervener/third Party

Procedural Posture

Matrimonial/family (financial Remedy) / Application to Set Aside Order; Preliminary Issues Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction to order payment of £500,000 held in court to the wife from company funds
  2. 2 Whether the corporate veil could be pierced to treat company assets as the husband's
  3. 3 Whether the payment into court by the company created an entitlement for the wife

Ratio Decidendi

The court had no jurisdiction to order payment of the £500,000 held in court to the wife because the husband had no beneficial interest in the company assets, there was no basis for piercing the corporate veil in the absence of impropriety, and the payment into court did not create an entitlement for the wife. Paragraph 2 of the order was made without power or jurisdiction and must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Application granted; paragraph 2 of the order set aside; payment out to City Docs Limited ordered.

Orders

  • Paragraph 2 of the order of 11 March 2011 is set aside.
  • The £500,000 paid into court and accrued interest to be paid out forthwith to City Docs Limited, subject to undertakings.