McFarlane v McFarlane

McFarlane v McFarlane

Where the payer's income substantially exceeds the needs of both parties, periodical payments may exceed needs and allow the payee to accumulate capital, provided this is directed towards achieving financial independence and a clean break within a reasonable term. The statutory duty under section 25A Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 to consider a clean break is paramount; open-ended joint lives orders are inappropriate in such exceptional cases.

Parties
Applicant: Mrs McFarlane; Respondent: Mr McFarlane; Applicant: Mrs Parlour; Respondent: Mr Parlour
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil (family/ancillary Relief) / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders of Bennett J set aside.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Periodical Payments, Clean Break Principle, Division of Income, Maintenance, Capital Provision
Family Law Ancillary Relief Periodical Payments Clean Break Principle Division of Income Maintenance Capital Provision

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs McFarlane

Applicant

Mr McFarlane

Respondent

Mrs Parlour

Applicant

Mr Parlour

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil (family/ancillary Relief) / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What principles govern the quantification of periodical payments where the payer's income greatly exceeds the payee's needs?
  2. 2 Should periodical payments orders allow for accumulation of capital by the payee?
  3. 3 What is the role of the clean break principle under section 25A Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 in high income cases?

Ratio Decidendi

Where the payer's income substantially exceeds the needs of both parties, periodical payments may exceed needs and allow the payee to accumulate capital, provided this is directed towards achieving financial independence and a clean break within a reasonable term. The statutory duty under section 25A Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 to consider a clean break is paramount; open-ended joint lives orders are inappropriate in such exceptional cases.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders of Bennett J set aside.

Orders

  • Order of the district judge in McFarlane restored (periodical payments £250,000 per annum for five years, not joint lives, without index linking).
  • In Parlour, periodical payments of £250,000 per annum for four years, not joint lives, subject to review for clean break.