Leake v Goldsmith

Leake v Goldsmith

The decree nisi and section 41 certificate previously pronounced under the wrong case number were set aside by consent, and the decree nisi was properly pronounced on the correct petition, with time for decree absolute abridged to 7 days.

Parties
Petitioner: Julia Charlotte Leake; Respondent: Gary Christopher Goldsmith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition / Pronouncement of Decree Nisi
Outcome
Decree nisi pronounced on correct petition; previous orders set aside by consent; time for decree absolute abridged to 7 days.
Legal Topics
Divorce, Decree Nisi, Procedural Error, Setting Aside Orders
Family Law Divorce Decree Nisi Procedural Error Setting Aside Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julia Charlotte Leake

Petitioner

Gary Christopher Goldsmith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition / Pronouncement of Decree Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decree nisi pronounced under the wrong case number was valid
  2. 2 Whether the orders made under the incorrect file should be set aside and the correct petition listed for pronouncement

Ratio Decidendi

The decree nisi and section 41 certificate previously pronounced under the wrong case number were set aside by consent, and the decree nisi was properly pronounced on the correct petition, with time for decree absolute abridged to 7 days.

Court Disposition

Decree nisi pronounced on correct petition; previous orders set aside by consent; time for decree absolute abridged to 7 days.

Orders

  • Orders dated 19 December 2008 in FD08D02250 set aside by consent.
  • Decree nisi pronounced on the wife's petition dated 30 July 2008 in FD08D03699 as amended.