Murphy v Murphy

Murphy v Murphy

On the facts, it would be speculative and unreasonable to fix a step-down in maintenance or impose a term order, as the wife's future earning capacity is uncertain and her financial position is precarious due to childcare responsibilities. The existing order, which provides for a reduction in maintenance linked to actual earned income, already protects the husband's interests. The statutory test for a term order is not met, as the court cannot form the opinion that the wife will be able to adjust without undue hardship at a fixed future date.

Parties
Petitioner: Julie Anne Murphy; Respondent: Julian Murphy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief (financial Remedies) in Divorce / Post Fdr, Determination of Duration and Step Down of Periodical Payments
Outcome
Application for step-down and term order refused; existing order to remain with clarifications.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Periodical Payments, Maintenance, Term Orders, Step Down Provisions, Earning Capacity, Welfare of Children
Family Law Ancillary Relief Periodical Payments Maintenance Term Orders Step Down Provisions Earning Capacity Welfare of Children

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

Parties

Julie Anne Murphy

Petitioner

Julian Murphy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief (financial Remedies) in Divorce / Post Fdr, Determination of Duration and Step Down of Periodical Payments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to impose a step-down in periodical payments to the wife at a defined future date
  2. 2 Whether to impose a term order limiting the duration of periodical payments to the wife

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts, it would be speculative and unreasonable to fix a step-down in maintenance or impose a term order, as the wife's future earning capacity is uncertain and her financial position is precarious due to childcare responsibilities. The existing order, which provides for a reduction in maintenance linked to actual earned income, already protects the husband's interests. The statutory test for a term order is not met, as the court cannot form the opinion that the wife will be able to adjust without undue hardship at a fixed future date.

Court Disposition

Application for step-down and term order refused; existing order to remain with clarifications.

Orders

  • No step-down in periodical payments imposed at this stage.
  • No term order imposed; maintenance continues until further order or remarriage.