PS v HF and SS [2008] JRC 128 (12 August 2008)

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petitioner (husband)

Petitioner

Respondent (wife)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Matrimonial Financial Relief / Application to Set Aside Final Consent Order

  1. 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.