AB v CD

AB v CD

The applicant's second set-aside application is struck out because the allegations of fraud and non-disclosure could and should have been pursued in 2016; there is no new or fresh evidence justifying reopening the 2016 consent order; the application is an abuse of process and lacks reasonable grounds; and the finality of the clean break agreement must be respected.

Parties
Applicant: AB; Respondent: CD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Financial Remedy Proceedings (set Aside/strike Out Application) / Ruling on Strike Out Application Against Second Set Aside Application
Outcome
Application struck out; relief granted to respondent.
Legal Topics
Financial Remedies, Consent Orders, Non Disclosure, Fraud, Abuse of Process, Strike Out Applications, Res Judicata, Clean Break, Case Management
Family Law Civil Procedure Financial Remedies Consent Orders Non Disclosure Fraud Abuse of Process Strike Out Applications +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Applicant

CD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Financial Remedy Proceedings (set Aside/strike Out Application) / Ruling on Strike Out Application Against Second Set Aside Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's second set-aside application regarding the 2016 consent order should be struck out as an abuse of process or for disclosing no reasonable grounds
  2. 2 Whether there is new or fresh evidence of fraud or non-disclosure justifying reopening the 2016 consent order
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is precluded by the Henderson principle or by undertakings in the 2016 order from relitigating issues already compromised

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's second set-aside application is struck out because the allegations of fraud and non-disclosure could and should have been pursued in 2016; there is no new or fresh evidence justifying reopening the 2016 consent order; the application is an abuse of process and lacks reasonable grounds; and the finality of the clean break agreement must be respected.

Court Disposition

Application struck out; relief granted to respondent.

Orders

  • The applicant's set-aside application is struck out as an abuse of process and for disclosing no reasonable grounds.
  • The respondent's strike-out application is granted.