K -v- K [2006] IESC 4 (09 February 2006)

K -v- K [2006] IESC 4 (09 February 2006)

The Supreme Court held that it was proper for the High Court to order the lump sum and maintenance to be paid in euros, as the wife intended to reside and expend the funds in Ireland, and that the quantum of the orders was appropriate. However, it was unjust for the husband to bear both parties' costs of the first trial, as neither party was to blame for the outcome; each party should bear their own costs for that trial.

Citation
[2006] IESC 4
Parties
Applicant/respondent: M. K.; Respondent/appellant: J. P. K.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
09 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision on Ancillary Relief and Costs Following Divorce
Outcome
Order of the High Court affirmed except as to the costs of the first trial, which is varied; no order as to costs of the first trial.
Legal Topics
Divorce, Ancillary Relief, Maintenance, Lump Sum Payment, Costs, Currency of Payment
Family Law Divorce Ancillary Relief Maintenance Lump Sum Payment Costs Currency of Payment

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. K.

Applicant/respondent

J. P. K.

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision on Ancillary Relief and Costs Following Divorce

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lump sum and maintenance should be paid in euros or dollars
  2. 2 Whether the quantum of the lump sum and maintenance was appropriate
  3. 3 Whether the husband should bear the costs of both trials

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that it was proper for the High Court to order the lump sum and maintenance to be paid in euros, as the wife intended to reside and expend the funds in Ireland, and that the quantum of the orders was appropriate. However, it was unjust for the husband to bear both parties' costs of the first trial, as neither party was to blame for the outcome; each party should bear their own costs for that trial.

Court Disposition

Order of the High Court affirmed except as to the costs of the first trial, which is varied; no order as to costs of the first trial.

Orders

  • Husband to pay lump sum of €450,000 to wife.
  • Husband to transfer entire beneficial ownership in family home to wife.