Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Jersey decisions
Decisions matching the current search
F v G (Family) 12-Feb-2021 [2021] JRC 105 (12 February 2021)
The Royal Court varied child maintenance for HH, ordering the father to pay ÂŁ750 per month inclusive of school fees, with arrears repaid at ÂŁ100 monthly.
E v F (Family) 30-Oct-2019 [2019] JRC 218 (30 October 2019)
The Royal Court varied child maintenance after finding the father’s finances clearer than claimed, reduced future payments to £425 per month, and upheld arrears.
Q -v- R (Matrimonial) [2017] JRC 123 (01 August 2017)
In a spousal maintenance review, the Royal Court refused disclosure about the respondent’s new wife’s income and certain bank transactions, finding them presently irrelevant.
O -v- P (Matrimonial) [2015] JRC 210 (13 October 2015)
Divorce financial remedy judgment dividing matrimonial assets, awarding the wife the home equity, and ordering spousal and child maintenance with review provisions.
In the matter of L [2010] JRC 082A (26 April 2010)
The court held that, after a mistrial-like setting aside for material non-disclosure, disclosure on re-hearing should extend to all assets up to the present and no fixed cut-off date was required.
L v S [2009] JRC 048A (16 March 2009)
The court set child maintenance at £400 per month for a child where the father’s income varied significantly, refused backdating, and made no costs order.
PS v HF and SS [2008] JRC 128 (12 August 2008)
The Jersey Royal Court refused to set aside a matrimonial consent order, holding there was no material non-disclosure, no lack of scrutiny, and no exceptional injustice.
PS v HF [2008] JRC 070 (29 April 2008)
The court partly granted an application for further answers to a questionnaire in ancillary relief proceedings, ordering additional disclosure only where proportionate and necessary.
D v M [2000] JRC 5 (20 January 2000)
In a divorce financial remedy case, the court found the husband had not fully disclosed his finances and awarded the wife a transfer of his home share, lump sums, and costs.
Explore more
