D v D [2009] NIMaster 75 [2009] (27 October 2009)

D v D [2009] NIMaster 75 [2009] (27 October 2009)

A post-separation windfall resulting from price fluctuation and entrepreneurial activity does not constitute an exceptional or unforeseen change of circumstances sufficient to justify reopening a separation agreement freely entered into with legal advice. The principles in Edgar v Edgar apply, and the wife's application for ancillary relief is dismissed.

Citation
[1985] AC 424
Parties
Petitioner: D; Respondent: D
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
27 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief Application (family Law) / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/post Agreement Windfall Claim
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Separation Agreements, Variation of Financial Orders, Post Separation Windfall, Finality of Agreements

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D

Petitioner

D

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief Application (family Law) / Judgment on Application to Set Aside/post Agreement Windfall Claim

  1. 1 Whether a separation agreement can be reopened due to a post-agreement windfall received by one party
  2. 2 Whether the principles in Edgar v Edgar or Barder v Barder apply to reopening the agreement

Ratio Decidendi

A post-separation windfall resulting from price fluctuation and entrepreneurial activity does not constitute an exceptional or unforeseen change of circumstances sufficient to justify reopening a separation agreement freely entered into with legal advice. The principles in Edgar v Edgar apply, and the wife's application for ancillary relief is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Wife's application for ancillary relief is dismissed.