C v S

C v S

The application to remortgage and invest the £250,000 is granted because the order envisaged such steps, the child's interests are fully protected, and refusal would destabilise housing for A. Costs are awarded against W due to her unreasonable opposition and procedural conduct.

Parties
Applicant: C (Husband); Respondent: S (Wife)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Family / Post Judgment Implementation Application
Outcome
Application granted; costs awarded against respondent
Legal Topics
Implementation of Financial Orders, Child Welfare, Costs in Family Proceedings, Remortgage Approval
Family Law Implementation of Financial Orders Child Welfare Costs in Family Proceedings Remortgage Approval

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C (Husband)

Applicant

S (Wife)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Post Judgment Implementation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant (H) should be permitted to remortgage the property held for the benefit of the child
  2. 2 Whether the applicant should be permitted to invest £250,000 held in a bank account into the property
  3. 3 Whether the respondent (W) should pay the costs of the application

Ratio Decidendi

The application to remortgage and invest the £250,000 is granted because the order envisaged such steps, the child's interests are fully protected, and refusal would destabilise housing for A. Costs are awarded against W due to her unreasonable opposition and procedural conduct.

Court Disposition

Application granted; costs awarded against respondent

Orders

  • H is permitted to remortgage the property for the benefit of A.
  • H is permitted to invest the £250,000 in the property.