B v B
The increase in value of the property was foreseeable, resulting from market movement and refurbishment by the husband, and does not meet the Barder principle requirements for a supervening event. There was no misrepresentation or fundamental error in valuation at the time of the consent order. The wife has no reasonable prospect of success on appeal.
- Parties
- Applicant: B; Respondent: B
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 26 October 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Divorce/ancillary Relief / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time Against Consent Order
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Ancillary Relief, Consent Orders, Appeals Out of Time, Valuation of Matrimonial Assets, Misrepresentation, Non Disclosure, Barder Principle
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
B
Applicant
B
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Divorce/ancillary Relief / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time Against Consent Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted against a consent order for financial provision based on alleged error of valuation, misrepresentation, or supervening Barder event
Ratio Decidendi
The increase in value of the property was foreseeable, resulting from market movement and refurbishment by the husband, and does not meet the Barder principle requirements for a supervening event. There was no misrepresentation or fundamental error in valuation at the time of the consent order. The wife has no reasonable prospect of success on appeal.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Orders
- Applicant to pay respondent’s costs, such costs to be assessed if not agreed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment