PS v HF and SS [2008] JRC 128 (12 August 2008)
The respondent failed to establish grounds for setting aside the consent order. There was no material non-disclosure, no lack of judicial scrutiny, no exceptional injustice from alleged bad legal advice, and no supervening event invalidating the basis of the order. The policy of finality and clean break prevails.
- Citation
- [2008] JRC 128
- Parties
- Petitioner: Petitioner (husband); Respondent: Respondent (wife)
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 12 August 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Matrimonial Financial Relief / Application to Set Aside Final Consent Order
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Consent Orders, Financial Disclosure, Variation of Orders, Clean Break, Maintenance, Pension Sharing
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Petitioner (husband)
Petitioner
Respondent (wife)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Matrimonial Financial Relief / Application to Set Aside Final Consent Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the consent order should be set aside for bad legal advice, lack of judicial scrutiny, material non-disclosure, or supervening events
Ratio Decidendi
The respondent failed to establish grounds for setting aside the consent order. There was no material non-disclosure, no lack of judicial scrutiny, no exceptional injustice from alleged bad legal advice, and no supervening event invalidating the basis of the order. The policy of finality and clean break prevails.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- Respondent is bound by the terms of the consent order and debarred from seeking further financial relief.
- Directions to proceed with division of remaining assets under the consent order.
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