Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
The need for proportionality and the ‘Covid impact’
Simon Wilkinson, Parklane PlowdenThe Covid-19 pandemic has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. Within the courts and tribunals service there has been a plethora of guidance since March 2020 which...
Local authority input into private law proceedings, part II
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingsLucy Logan Green, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingThis article considers the interplay between private and public law proceedings, focusing on the law relating...
Time for change (II)
Lisa Parkinson, Family mediation trainer, co-founder and a Vice-President of the Family Mediators AssociationThe family law community needs to respond to the urgent call for change from the...
How Can I Wed Thee? – Let Me Change the Ways: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper on ‘Weddings’ Law (2020)
Professor Chris Barton, A Vice-President of the Family Mediators Association, Academic Door Tenant, Regent Chambers, Stoke-on-TrentThis article considers the Paper's 91 Consultation Questions...
Consultation on the proposed transfer of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of costs to the Legal Aid Agency
The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on the proposed transfer from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to the Legal Aid Agency of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of...
View all articles
Authors

ANCILLARY RELIEF: B v B (Ancillary Relief) [2008] EWCA Civ 543

Sep 29, 2018, 17:27 PM
Slug : b-v-b-ancillary-relief-2008-ewca-civ-543
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 7, 2008, 06:49 AM
Article ID : 86581

(Court of Appeal; Sir Mark Potter P, Wall and Hughes LJJ; 19 March 2008)

One possible reason for departing from equality was recognised to be that there were assets that were the product not of efforts of different kinds during the marriage, but of inheritance by one spouse only. In this unusual case, in which the whole of the capital available to the parties had been brought into the marriage by the wife from a source entirely external to it, and in which the marriage had played no part, however indirectly, in the acquisition of any of the assets now available, dividing the assets approximately equally did not lead to a fair result. Although not a big money case, this was not a case in which the needs of the parties compelled the court to disregard the source of the assets.

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