H v G [2002] JRC 179 (01 October 2002)

H v G [2002] JRC 179 (01 October 2002)

A clean break was not possible due to the Petitioner's limited immediate resources and the illiquid nature of his pension. The most equitable solution was a part-immediate, part-deferred lump sum, with periodic payments adjusted for cost of living, and a final cut-off at retirement or death.

Citation
[2002] JRC 179
Parties
Petitioner: Mr H; Respondent: Mrs H
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
01 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial Appeal / Appeal From Order of Family Registrar
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; order varied
Legal Topics
Financial Provision, Lump Sum Payment, Clean Break, Pensions, Maintenance, Variation of Order
Family Law Financial Provision Lump Sum Payment Clean Break Pensions Maintenance Variation of Order

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr H

Petitioner

Mrs H

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Matrimonial Appeal / Appeal From Order of Family Registrar

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lump sum of £100,000 should be paid immediately or deferred
  2. 2 Whether the Petitioner's available assets justified immediate payment
  3. 3 Consideration of the parties' respective financial needs and resources

Ratio Decidendi

A clean break was not possible due to the Petitioner's limited immediate resources and the illiquid nature of his pension. The most equitable solution was a part-immediate, part-deferred lump sum, with periodic payments adjusted for cost of living, and a final cut-off at retirement or death.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; order varied

Orders

  • Petitioner to pay Respondent £32,000 immediately (including any prior payment of £5,000)
  • Pearl Assurance policy to be surrendered and divided equally; Respondent to receive £10,948