Rose v Rose

Rose v Rose

There is no evidence of material non-disclosure by the wife as at 3 August 2001 that would have led to a substantially different order. The husband's application is without merit, is an abuse of process, and is further barred by unreasonable delay. The application is struck out.

Parties
Applicant: Jonathan Rose; Respondent: Julia Rose
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Family / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Summons
Outcome
application struck out
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Consent Order, Non Disclosure, Application to Set Aside, Abuse of Process, Delay
Family Law Ancillary Relief Consent Order Non Disclosure Application to Set Aside Abuse of Process Delay

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jonathan Rose

Applicant

Julia Rose

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the husband's application to set aside the consent order should be struck out for lack of merit and abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether there was material non-disclosure by the wife justifying setting aside the consent order
  3. 3 Whether delay by the husband in launching the application is a bar to relief

Ratio Decidendi

There is no evidence of material non-disclosure by the wife as at 3 August 2001 that would have led to a substantially different order. The husband's application is without merit, is an abuse of process, and is further barred by unreasonable delay. The application is struck out.

Court Disposition

application struck out

Orders

  • The husband's application to set aside the consent order of 3 August 2001 is struck out.