Solomon v Solomon & Ors (Rev 2)

Solomon v Solomon & Ors (Rev 2)

The costs order was within the discretion of the first instance judge, as the section 37 application was misconceived, the applicant failed to engage with the appropriate solution until costs had been expended, and the general rule on costs in interim applications applied. There was no basis for the appeal to succeed.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Dr Anthony Solomon; Respondent: Mrs Nivia Solomon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal and Appeal Against Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Financial Remedies, Costs, Jurisdiction Under Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, Declaratory Relief
Family Law Financial Remedies Costs Jurisdiction Under Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 Declaratory Relief

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Anthony Solomon

Applicant

Mrs Nivia Solomon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal and Appeal Against Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction under section 37 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 to set aside property dispositions not made by a party to the marriage
  2. 2 Whether the costs order against the applicant was properly made

Ratio Decidendi

The costs order was within the discretion of the first instance judge, as the section 37 application was misconceived, the applicant failed to engage with the appropriate solution until costs had been expended, and the general rule on costs in interim applications applied. There was no basis for the appeal to succeed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Costs order against the applicant upheld
  • Application for permission to appeal refused