Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2012] All ER (D) 209 (Mar)
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Thorpe, Etherton and Lewison LJJ
Representation Robert Peel QC and Nicholas Chapman (instructed by Ellis Jones, Bournemouth) for the husband.
  Jonathan Swift (instructed by Williams Thompson Solicitors LLP, Bournemouth) for the wife.
Judgment Dates: 28 March 2012

Catchwords

Divorce - Financial provision - Parties agreeing to lump sum designed to discharge mortgage on matrimonial home - Wife re-mortgaging matrimonial home and using funds to purchase a non-income producing bond - Judge ruling that wife entitled to re-capitalisation of financial provisions that include an element for the repayment of mortgage - Whether judge erring in including element of mortgage repayments in capitalisation.

The Case

Divorce Financial provision. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled that a wife had not been entitled to a sum representing mortgage repayments in a capitalisation figure in circumstances where she had already received a lump sum in order to discharge the mortgage but had chosen to invest part of that lump sum in a non-income earning bond.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis®Library

  • Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
  • The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
  • Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases