ON v ON

ON v ON

The husband committed deliberate, fraudulent non-disclosure by failing to reveal material post-hearing business developments that significantly increased the value of his business before the arbitral award was finalized. The duty of full and frank disclosure continued until the court order, not the arbitration hearing. The arbitral award was therefore wrong and required adjustment to reflect the true asset position and ensure fairness.

Parties
Applicant: ON; Respondent: ON
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Financial Remedy Proceedings (family) / Post Arbitral Award, Application to Set Aside and Adjust Arbitral Award Due to Alleged Fraudulent Non Disclosure
Outcome
Arbitral award set aside and adjusted; wife awarded additional lump sum and costs; periodical payments order continues.
Legal Topics
Financial Remedy, Non Disclosure, Arbitral Award, Fraud, Costs
Family Law Arbitration Financial Remedy Non Disclosure Arbitral Award Fraud Costs

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ON

Applicant

ON

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Financial Remedy Proceedings (family) / Post Arbitral Award, Application to Set Aside and Adjust Arbitral Award Due to Alleged Fraudulent Non Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there has been fraudulent non-disclosure by the husband
  2. 2 Whether the non-disclosure was material to the arbitral award
  3. 3 What adjustment, if any, should be made to reflect the non-disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

The husband committed deliberate, fraudulent non-disclosure by failing to reveal material post-hearing business developments that significantly increased the value of his business before the arbitral award was finalized. The duty of full and frank disclosure continued until the court order, not the arbitration hearing. The arbitral award was therefore wrong and required adjustment to reflect the true asset position and ensure fairness.

Court Disposition

Arbitral award set aside and adjusted; wife awarded additional lump sum and costs; periodical payments order continues.

Orders

  • Wife to receive £1.16 million more as lump sum, payable within 18 months with 4% interest until due date, then Judgment Act rate thereafter.
  • Wife awarded £200,000 in costs, payable within 28 days.