CR v - And - [2013] EWHC 295 (Fam) (13 February 2013)

CR v - And - [2013] EWHC 295 (Fam) (13 February 2013)

The beneficial ownership of the FMH is with the husband and wife. The documents (NSHA, MSPA, DSA) purporting to show the father as beneficial owner are shams, created to mislead the court and/or the wife. The father provided funds as gifts, not as investments or loans conferring beneficial ownership. The company (IU Limited) does not beneficially own the property; it is a vehicle. The court rejects the respondents' case as false and finds for the applicant.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 295 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant: CR; First Respondent (husband): MZ; Second Respondent (father): FZ; Third Respondent (company): IU Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Family Division Preliminary Issue / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Beneficial Ownership of Property and Company Shares
Outcome
Judgment for the applicant. The FMH is beneficially owned by the husband and wife. Order for indemnity costs against the husband and father.
Legal Topics
Beneficial Ownership, Sham Documents, Constructive Trusts, Company Law, Matrimonial Property, Costs (indemnity)
Family Law Trusts and Equity Property Law Beneficial Ownership Sham Documents Constructive Trusts Company Law Matrimonial Property +1 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CR

Applicant

MZ

First Respondent (husband)

FZ

Second Respondent (father)

IU Limited

Third Respondent (company)

Procedural Posture

Family Division Preliminary Issue / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Beneficial Ownership of Property and Company Shares

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is the beneficial owner of the former matrimonial home (FMH)?
  2. 2 If the beneficial owner is a company, who is the beneficial owner of the shares in that company?
  3. 3 Are certain documents (NSHA, MSPA, DSA) shams intended to mislead the court?

Ratio Decidendi

The beneficial ownership of the FMH is with the husband and wife. The documents (NSHA, MSPA, DSA) purporting to show the father as beneficial owner are shams, created to mislead the court and/or the wife. The father provided funds as gifts, not as investments or loans conferring beneficial ownership. The company (IU Limited) does not beneficially own the property; it is a vehicle. The court rejects the respondents' case as false and finds for the applicant.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the applicant. The FMH is beneficially owned by the husband and wife. Order for indemnity costs against the husband and father.

Orders

  • Declaration that the FMH is beneficially owned by the husband and wife.
  • Order for indemnity costs in favour of the applicant against the husband and father.