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
H v J (Matrimonial) 31-Mar-21 [2021] JRC 106 (31 March 2021)
The Registrar refused to approve a draft consent order in matrimonial proceedings because it was inherently unfair, with no adequate capital or pension compensation for the wife.
L -v- M (Matrimonial) [2016] JRC 184A (11 October 2016)
Interim matrimonial relief decision on a pre-nuptial agreement. The court held it was a relevant factor, but its weight would be decided after fuller needs evidence.
L v M (Matrimonial)
The Royal Court considered what weight to give a pre-nuptial agreement in ancillary relief proceedings, but left the issue to be decided after fuller evidence.
Matrimonial - a clean break [2012] JRC 000 (02 November 2012)
The Royal Court held that it can order a matrimonial clean break in Jersey and rejected the wife’s argument that both parties must agree.
H v H [2008] JRC 097A (18 June 2008)
The court granted the wife a ÂŁ10,000 interim lump sum for debts and immediate living expenses, but refused any payment on account of a final lump sum.
J v M [2008] JRC 031A (26 February 2008)
The Jersey Royal Court varied post-divorce maintenance, setting child maintenance at ÂŁ1,000 per month and spousal maintenance at ÂŁ3,000 per month for five years.
E v P and G [2004] JRC 170 (23 September 2004)
A Jersey matrimonial finance decision awarding the wife a lump sum, ongoing maintenance, and sole title to the former matrimonial home, while refusing child maintenance.
re X Trust M convened v [2002] JRC 119B (13 June 2002)
The Royal Court approved a trustee’s proposed distributions to help a beneficiary comply with divorce-related financial orders, holding they were not a fraud on a power.
In re X Trust v [2002] JLR 377 (13 June 2002)
The court held that trustees may distribute to a beneficiary under a discretionary trust to enable compliance with a divorce financial provision order, without committing a fraud on power.
J v M [2002] JRC 102 (22 May 2002)
The Jersey Royal Court held that a family trust was not a post-nuptial settlement, but still treated the trust as a relevant resource when setting financial provision on divorce.
Explore more
