G v H [2001] JRC 141B (29 June 2001)
The correct method for valuing the company is the 'Earnings Basis', but for matrimonial proceedings, the court must consider the long-term value and risks. The wife's interest in the company is assessed at £300,000, resulting in a modest asset gap. To achieve fairness and equal division, the husband must pay the wife £25,000.
- Citation
- [2001] JRC 141B
- Parties
- Petitioner: Wife; Respondent: Husband
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 29 June 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Matrimonial Petition / Final Judgment on Ancillary Matters
- Outcome
- husband ordered to pay wife £25,000 within one month
- Legal Topics
- Division of Matrimonial Assets, Valuation of Business, Equal Division Principle, Financial Provision
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Wife
Petitioner
Husband
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial Petition / Final Judgment on Ancillary Matters
Legal Issues
- 1 How should the wife's business be valued for matrimonial asset division?
- 2 Should assets be divided equally in light of White v White?
- 3 Is the husband's proposal for asset retention fair given the business valuation?
Ratio Decidendi
The correct method for valuing the company is the 'Earnings Basis', but for matrimonial proceedings, the court must consider the long-term value and risks. The wife's interest in the company is assessed at £300,000, resulting in a modest asset gap. To achieve fairness and equal division, the husband must pay the wife £25,000.
Court Disposition
husband ordered to pay wife £25,000 within one month
Orders
- husband to pay wife £25,000 within one month
- further applications regarding costs may be heard
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment