TM v AM

TM v AM

There was no direct or circumstantial evidence that the wife owned or benefitted from the diamond, and any discrepancies in asset schedules were minor and not material. The husband failed to discharge the burden of proof for material non-disclosure or fraud. The application to set aside the consent order is dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: TM; Respondent: AM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Consent Order (family/financial Remedy) / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Financial Remedies, Consent Orders, Non Disclosure, Fraud, Setting Aside Orders
Family Law Financial Remedies Consent Orders Non Disclosure Fraud Setting Aside Orders

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TM

Applicant

AM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Consent Order (family/financial Remedy) / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the wife failed to disclose ownership of a valuable diamond prior to the consent order, amounting to material non-disclosure or fraud
  2. 2 Whether the wife's solicitors submitted a schedule of assets with amended figures without consulting or informing the husband
  3. 3 Whether any consequential orders or costs should follow

Ratio Decidendi

There was no direct or circumstantial evidence that the wife owned or benefitted from the diamond, and any discrepancies in asset schedules were minor and not material. The husband failed to discharge the burden of proof for material non-disclosure or fraud. The application to set aside the consent order is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed