Spotlight
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...
Spotlight
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
Authors

Lump sum, Lump sums and Instalments: a brief history

Sep 29, 2018, 21:08 PM
Slug : Groarke-JulyFLJ2013-856
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 20, 2013, 02:00 AM
Article ID : 102867

Nathaniel Groarke

Associate Solicitor, Withers LLP

Following the case of Hamilton v Hamilton [2013] EWCA Civ 13, [2013] 1 FLR (forthcoming), this article explores the developments in the law relating to, on the one hand, lump sums and, on the other, lump sums by instalments and the impact of such developments for family law practitioners and, always more importantly, the clients.  

There is a whistle-stop tour through the case law.  For example, right back in 1973, the Court of Appeal in Coleman v Coleman [1973] Fam. 10, made it clear that while the court had the power to make an order for more than one lump sum payment (lump sums) within an order, there could only be one order. This is followed by a review of the Court's powers to vary lump sums by instalments and asks if this power extends to quantum as well as timing.

In Hamilton, Mrs Justice Baron gave some helpful drafting guidelines, but this article advises caution - the guidelines might fit most cases, but there is not always a 'one size fits all' solution and consideration must be given to the facts of any particular case. 

This article offers practical advice on how to approach this thorny issue of lump sums and lump sums by instalments.

The full version of this article appears in the July 2013 issue of Family Law.   

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