Evans v Evans

Evans v Evans

The court held that the sharing principle applies, but a modest departure from equality is justified due to the husband's post-separation endeavour in Confluence. No special contribution was established. The wife is awarded 44% of the Confluence shares and warrants, and the husband 56%. Non-Confluence assets are divided broadly equally, with the wife receiving a greater share of liquid assets to meet immediate needs. Maintenance for the wife is ordered until the Confluence shares are realised. The wife's add-back claim is rejected. No order as to costs is made, save for specific implementation and costs issues.

Parties
Applicant: Jenifer Eileen Evans; Respondent: Mark Stephen Evans
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Financial Remedy (ancillary Relief) Proceedings Following Divorce / Judgment After Rehearing of Wife's Financial Application
Outcome
Financial remedy judgment: division of assets, maintenance, and costs orders made.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Division of Matrimonial Assets, Special Contribution, Post Separation Endeavour, Maintenance, Add Back, Clean Break, Child Maintenance, Costs
Family Law Ancillary Relief Division of Matrimonial Assets Special Contribution Post Separation Endeavour Maintenance Add Back Clean Break +2 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jenifer Eileen Evans

Applicant

Mark Stephen Evans

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Financial Remedy (ancillary Relief) Proceedings Following Divorce / Judgment After Rehearing of Wife's Financial Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What percentage of Confluence shares should each party receive?
  2. 2 How should the currently available capital resources be divided?
  3. 3 Should there be a clean break or should the wife receive maintenance?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the sharing principle applies, but a modest departure from equality is justified due to the husband's post-separation endeavour in Confluence. No special contribution was established. The wife is awarded 44% of the Confluence shares and warrants, and the husband 56%. Non-Confluence assets are divided broadly equally, with the wife receiving a greater share of liquid assets to meet immediate needs. Maintenance for the wife is ordered until the Confluence shares are realised. The wife's add-back claim is rejected. No order as to costs is made, save for specific implementation and costs issues.

Court Disposition

Financial remedy judgment: division of assets, maintenance, and costs orders made.

Orders

  • Wife to receive 44% of Confluence shares and warrants; husband 56%.
  • Non-Confluence assets divided broadly equally, with wife receiving greater share of liquid assets (£2.4 million) to meet immediate needs.