Fitzgerald v Northcroft [1974] JJ 35 (01 May 1973)

Misconduct is relevant to financial provision only if it is gross and obvious, and may justify a costs order if it caused the breakdown of the marriage.

Citation: [1974] JJ 35
Parties: Applicant: Fitzgerald; Respondent: Northcroft
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Judgment Date: 01 May 1973
Procedural Posture: Family Law / Judgment
Outcome: Costs order may be made against the guilty party if misconduct caused the breakdown of the marriage.
Legal Topics: Financial Provision, Clean Break, Misconduct, Costs

Family Law Financial Provision Clean Break Misconduct 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 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

Fitzgerald

Applicant

Northcroft

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether misconduct should be considered in financial provision orders
2 Extent to which misconduct affects costs and financial settlement

Ratio Decidendi

Misconduct is relevant to financial provision only if it is gross and obvious, and may justify a costs order if it caused the breakdown of the marriage.

Court Disposition

Costs order may be made against the guilty party if misconduct caused the breakdown of the marriage.