BP AGAINST R & M OR P [2016] ScotSC 1 (07 January 2016)

BP AGAINST R & M OR P [2016] ScotSC 1 (07 January 2016)

Special circumstances justified departure from equal sharing: (1) the pursuer’s Aegon pension derived from pre-marital funds and was excluded; (2) [Property One] was to be divided 40% to pursuer, 60% to defender, reflecting pre-marital investment and agreed title; (3) the defender’s pre-marital savings were left out of account; (4) the defender was entitled to half the wind turbine income up to proof (£13,000); (5) the division of other assets and debts was on an equal basis; (6) no further adjustment was justified for child care burden given the defender’s greater resources and the pursuer’s contact costs.

Citation
[2016] ScotSC 1
Parties
Pursuer: B P; Defender: Mrs. R M or P
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Divorce / Judgment After Proof, Prior to Final Orders and Decree
Outcome
Decree of divorce to be granted after final orders; cause continued for hearing on implementation orders.
Legal Topics
Divorce, Division of Matrimonial Property, Special Circumstances, Child Welfare, Pensions, Capital Payment
Family Law Divorce Division of Matrimonial Property Special Circumstances Child Welfare Pensions Capital Payment

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 19
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B P

Pursuer

Mrs. R M or P

Defender

Procedural Posture

Divorce / Judgment After Proof, Prior to Final Orders and Decree

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special circumstances justify departure from equal sharing of matrimonial property
  2. 2 Valuation and allocation of matrimonial assets and debts
  3. 3 Entitlement to income from non-matrimonial asset (wind turbine contract)

Ratio Decidendi

Special circumstances justified departure from equal sharing: (1) the pursuer’s Aegon pension derived from pre-marital funds and was excluded; (2) [Property One] was to be divided 40% to pursuer, 60% to defender, reflecting pre-marital investment and agreed title; (3) the defender’s pre-marital savings were left out of account; (4) the defender was entitled to half the wind turbine income up to proof (£13,000); (5) the division of other assets and debts was on an equal basis; (6) no further adjustment was justified for child care burden given the defender’s greater resources and the pursuer’s contact costs.

Court Disposition

Decree of divorce to be granted after final orders; cause continued for hearing on implementation orders.

Orders

  • Title to [Property One] to be transferred to pursuer, who becomes solely liable for mortgage.
  • Title to [Property Two] to be transferred to defender.