Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
View all articles

FINANCIAL ORDERS: S v AG (Financial Remedy: Lottery Prize) [2011] EWHC 2637 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 19:11 PM
Slug : 2011EWHC2637
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 8, 2011, 11:25 AM
Article ID : 97245

(Family Division; Mostyn J; 14 October 2011)

The wife won a share of a lottery prize worth £500,000. At issue was the treatment of such a prize in financial remedy proceedings following divorce. Distinction between matrimonial and non-matrimonial property. In this case the prize was received by the wife during marriage and not after de facto separation and most of the money was invested in the matrimonial property. The husband was ignorant of wife's participation in lottery.

Held that the winnings could be characterised as non-matrimonial property which were converted to matrimonial property to the extent that a home was purchased. However the non-matrimonial nature of the source of the monies should be reflected in the award. Judge identified £82,000 as what the husband needed on clean break basis. 

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from