Marett v Marett [2008] JLR 384 (17 October 2008)

Marett v Marett [2008] JLR 384 (17 October 2008)

A consent order cannot be set aside merely because a party misunderstood or dislikes its consequences; there must be a fundamental mistake or supervening event to invalidate the order.

Citation
[2008] JLR 384
Parties
Applicant: Marett; Respondent: Marett
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
17 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Family Law / Application to Set Aside Consent Order
Outcome
application to set aside consent order refused
Legal Topics
Financial Provision, Consent Order, Setting Aside Orders, Error of Fact, Misrepresentation, Supervening Event, Contract Interpretation
Family Law Financial Provision Consent Order Setting Aside Orders Error of Fact Misrepresentation Supervening Event Contract Interpretation

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marett

Applicant

Marett

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law / Application to Set Aside Consent Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a consent order for financial provision can be set aside on grounds of error of fact or supervening event
  2. 2 Whether a misunderstanding or dislike of consequences amounts to vice du consentement

Ratio Decidendi

A consent order cannot be set aside merely because a party misunderstood or dislikes its consequences; there must be a fundamental mistake or supervening event to invalidate the order.

Court Disposition

application to set aside consent order refused