In the matter of II [2010] JRC 209 (18 November 2010)

In the matter of II [2010] JRC 209 (18 November 2010)

The Le Cornu agreement was given no weight due to improper pressure, lack of fairness, and absence of competent advice. Both properties are matrimonial assets. The parties' assets and income are insufficient to meet all needs; the bulk of the respondent's income is devoted to school fees, leaving the petitioner with no income and unsustainable debt. Fairness requires the petitioner to pay the respondent £55,000 and procure his release from the Winchester mortgage, failing which the property must be sold. The respondent is to continue paying school fees, but no spousal maintenance is currently possible beyond nominal maintenance to keep the claim open. The welfare of the children is...

Citation
[2010] JRC 209
Parties
Petitioner: A; Respondent: B
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
18 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief (financial Remedy) Following Divorce / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Partial grant of relief to both parties; orders made for lump sum, property arrangements, and nominal maintenance.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Financial Provision, Postnuptial Agreements, Disclosure, Matrimonial Property, Spousal Maintenance, Child Maintenance, Clean Break, Compensation, Children's Welfare
Family Law Ancillary Relief Financial Provision Postnuptial Agreements Disclosure Matrimonial Property Spousal Maintenance Child Maintenance +3 more

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Petitioner

B

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief (financial Remedy) Following Divorce / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Le Cornu postnuptial agreement should be given effect in the ancillary relief proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the respondent failed to give full and frank disclosure of his financial position
  3. 3 Whether the Jersey and Winchester properties are matrimonial assets or should be ring-fenced as non-matrimonial property

Ratio Decidendi

The Le Cornu agreement was given no weight due to improper pressure, lack of fairness, and absence of competent advice. Both properties are matrimonial assets. The parties' assets and income are insufficient to meet all needs; the bulk of the respondent's income is devoted to school fees, leaving the petitioner with no income and unsustainable debt. Fairness requires the petitioner to pay the respondent £55,000 and procure his release from the Winchester mortgage, failing which the property must be sold. The respondent is to continue paying school fees, but no spousal maintenance is currently possible beyond nominal maintenance to keep the claim open. The welfare of the children is...

Court Disposition

Partial grant of relief to both parties; orders made for lump sum, property arrangements, and nominal maintenance.

Orders

  • Petitioner to pay respondent a lump sum of £55,000 within three months.
  • Petitioner to procure respondent's release from the Winchester property mortgage within three months.