Husband fails to overturn divorce settlement after misleading court
A husband has failed to overturn what he considered an unreasonably generous divorce settlement imposed after a judge held that he had misled the court.
The case involved a couple who married in 1995 and separated in 2016. They had three dependent children. The wife had looked after the home and worked part time. She got a job after the couple separated.
A clean break was considered necessary due to the husband's assault and harassment of the wife.
According to her, the husband had net assets of £1.7 million.
The judge found that the husband had provided misleading and inadequate disclosure. He was ordered to pay the wife a lump sum of £1.4 million by a specified date, failing which interest would accrue.
An order was made under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 prohibiting the husband from applying for decree absolute until the couple had filed a declaration that they had taken the steps required to dissolve the marriage.
The husband appealed on the grounds that in the event of non-disclosure, the court had to give a precise figure or bracket for the undisclosed wealth before making a financial remedies order.
The High Court ruled against him. It held that to impose such a requirement on the court in all cases of non-disclosure would be likely to impede its task of achieving a fair outcome.
If you would like more information or advice about the issues raised in this article, or any aspect of family law please contact our expert legal team on 0208 004 0065, by email at firstname.lastname@example.org or using the form below.
Case Citations:  EWCA Civ 1482 MOHER v MOHER (2019) CA (Civ Div) (King LJ, Moylan LJ, Rose LJ)
The contents of this article is general information only. The information in this article is not legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this article was published. Readers should not act on the basis of the information included and should obtain independent expert advice from qualified solicitors such as those within our firm.