G v S [2009] EWHC 2377 (Fam) (01 October 2009)

G v S [2009] EWHC 2377 (Fam) (01 October 2009)

The application to set aside the September 2006 ancillary relief order fails. There was no material non-disclosure or misrepresentation by the respondent; the subsequent sale of the company at a much higher value was not foreseeable and does not constitute a Barder event. The original order was fair, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 2377 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant: G (formerly S); Respondent: S
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief / Financial Remedy (family) / Application to Set Aside Final Ancillary Relief Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Set Aside of Financial Orders, Non Disclosure, Mistake, Barder Events, Clean Break, Company Valuation in Divorce
Family Law Ancillary Relief Set Aside of Financial Orders Non Disclosure Mistake Barder Events Clean Break Company Valuation in Divorce

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G (formerly S)

Applicant

S

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief / Financial Remedy (family) / Application to Set Aside Final Ancillary Relief Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ancillary relief order of September 2006 should be set aside for misrepresentation, non-disclosure, mistake, or a supervening Barder event
  2. 2 Whether the respondent failed in his duty of full and frank disclosure prior to judgment
  3. 3 Whether subsequent events (sale of company at much higher value) invalidate the basis of the original order

Ratio Decidendi

The application to set aside the September 2006 ancillary relief order fails. There was no material non-disclosure or misrepresentation by the respondent; the subsequent sale of the company at a much higher value was not foreseeable and does not constitute a Barder event. The original order was fair, and the applicant was not entitled to share in the proceeds of the company, which were the result of the respondent's post-separation efforts. The outcome would not have been materially different even if the additional information had been disclosed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application to set aside the September 2006 ancillary relief order is dismissed.
  • No further financial provision is ordered.