AF v MF & Ors [2016] EWFC 65 (20 October 2016)

AF v MF & Ors [2016] EWFC 65 (20 October 2016)

The X Foundation is a genuine discretionary foundation, not a sham, and its assets are not a resource available to the Husband for the purposes of this financial remedy application. The Country E apartment is owned 90% by the Husband's Father and 10% by the Husband. The transfer of shares to the CW Trust was not proven to be for the purpose of defeating the Wife's claims. The matrimonial home and other assets are to be divided based on needs and the sharing principle, with appropriate consideration of non-matrimonial property and the parties' respective contributions and resources.

Citation
[2016] EWFC 65
Parties
Applicant: AF; First Respondent: MF; Second Respondent: OF; Third Respondent: AB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Financial Remedy Application (cross Applications) Following Divorce / Final Judgment
Outcome
Financial remedy order made; assets divided per judgment; X Foundation assets excluded as resource; Country E apartment treated as 90/10 in favour of Husband's Father/Husband; costs noted but not specifically ordered.
Legal Topics
Financial Remedies, Trusts and Foundations, Matrimonial Assets, Nuptial Settlements, Disclosure, Section 25 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
Family Law Financial Remedies Trusts and Foundations Matrimonial Assets Nuptial Settlements Disclosure Section 25 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 21
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AF

Applicant

MF

First Respondent

OF

Second Respondent

AB

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Financial Remedy Application (cross Applications) Following Divorce / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether assets held in the X Foundation are a resource available to the Husband for the purposes of financial remedy
  2. 2 Whether the Country E apartment is a matrimonial asset and in what shares
  3. 3 Whether the transfer of shares to the CW Trust was intended to defeat the Wife's claims

Ratio Decidendi

The X Foundation is a genuine discretionary foundation, not a sham, and its assets are not a resource available to the Husband for the purposes of this financial remedy application. The Country E apartment is owned 90% by the Husband's Father and 10% by the Husband. The transfer of shares to the CW Trust was not proven to be for the purpose of defeating the Wife's claims. The matrimonial home and other assets are to be divided based on needs and the sharing principle, with appropriate consideration of non-matrimonial property and the parties' respective contributions and resources.

Court Disposition

Financial remedy order made; assets divided per judgment; X Foundation assets excluded as resource; Country E apartment treated as 90/10 in favour of Husband's Father/Husband; costs noted but not specifically ordered.

Orders

  • Sale of matrimonial home with net equity divided
  • £50,000 to be paid to X Foundation for adjacent land