M O'B v B O'B [2012] IEHC 621 (20 January 2012)

The court found that the husband's ambivalence and lack of disclosure, combined with changed financial circumstances, justified deleting the lump sum, adjusting maintenance, and imposing reporting and cost orders, while staying blocking orders and removing the 'full and final settlement' clause.

Citation: [2012] IEHC 621
Parties: Applicant: M. O’B.; Respondent: B. O’B.
Jurisdiction: Ireland
Judgment Date: 20 January 2012
Procedural Posture: Divorce / Variation/enforcement of Decree
Outcome: Settlement varied; lump sum deleted; maintenance adjusted; reporting and cost orders imposed.
Legal Topics: Divorce, Maintenance, Property Adjustment, Disclosure, Variation of Settlement

Family Law Divorce Maintenance Property Adjustment Disclosure Variation of Settlement

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 5

Parties

M. O’B.

Applicant

B. O’B.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce / Variation/enforcement of Decree

Legal Issues

1 Whether the original divorce settlement should be varied due to non-disclosure and changed financial circumstances
2 Whether the lump sum payment should be enforced or deleted
3 Appropriate maintenance and property adjustment orders given current circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Settlement varied; lump sum deleted; maintenance adjusted; reporting and cost orders imposed.

Orders

Delete lump sum of €350,000.
Provide for maintenance of wife at €2,700 per month.