Spotlight
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
What happens when assets are tainted: financial remedies v confiscation proceedings revisited
Sarah Wood, 5SAHFollowing on from her 2019 article 'Financial Remedies v Confiscation Proceedings: What Takes Priority?’ ([2019] Fam Law 941) in which Sarah Wood looked, in general terms, about...
Disclosure 2: This time it’s practical
Andrew Shaw, New Court ChambersSam Prout, New Court ChambersThis article aims to provide a practical guide to navigating some disclosure issues that can arise in family proceedings concerning...
Placing looked after children outside of the jurisdiction (post-Brexit)
Michael Jones, Deans Court ChambersA summary of the legal provisions that apply to placing looked after children outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales. This article contains a brief summary of...
Rings, Rolexes and Renoirs – The treatment of gifts, engagement rings, and heirlooms when a relationship comes to an end
Sarah Dodds, Senior Associate, Kingsley NapleyLiam Hurren, Trainee Solicitor, Kingsley NapleyWhen a couple separates, thoughts often turn to the valuable or sentimental items which they acquired or...
HM Treasury responds to consultation on increasing normal minimum pension age
HM Treasury  has responded to its consultation on the proposed protections framework and implementing an increase of the normal minimum pension age (NMPA) from 55 to 57 in 2028, which will...
View all articles
Authors

Credit Crunch in the Court of Appeal: Myerson v Myerson

Sep 29, 2018, 17:20 PM
Matthew Brunsdon-Tully, Camini Kumar, Valentine Le Grice QC, Barristers, 1 Hare Court
Slug : credit-crunch-in-the-court-of-appeal-myerson-v-myerson
Meta Title : Credit Crunch in the Court of Appeal: Myerson v Myerson
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 2, 2009, 11:23 AM
Article ID : 85909

Matthew Brunsdon-Tully, Camini Kumar, Valentine Le Grice QC, Barristers, 1 Hare Court

On 11 March 2009, the 'credit crunch' case of Myerson v Myerson (No 2) [2009] EWCA Civ 282, [2009] 2 FLR (forthcoming), had its second outing in the Court of Appeal, this time in front of Thorpe, Smith and Sullivan LJJ. In the first appeal, Mr Myerson had successfully convinced the court (Lord Justice Thorpe being common to both constitutions) that Baron J, as the financial dispute resolution appointment (FDR) judge, was to have no further involvement in the case (Myerson v Myerson [2008] EWCA Civ 1376, [2009] 1 FLR 826). This time Mr Myerson sought to set aside the order, arrived at by consent following the FDR, on the basis that the dramatic depreciation in his assets caused by the global financial crisis amounted to a Barder event (see Barder v Caluori [1988] 1 AC 20), such that it rendered the order both unfair and unworkable.

The appeal aroused significant media interest as it was the first testing of the court's willingness to revisit settled agreements in light of the credit crunch. A favourable outcome for Mr Myerson, it was thought, would herald an influx of 'credit crunched' husbands seeking to review concluded settlements on the basis of unprecedented drops in the value of their investments. The court (perhaps predictably) signalled its disinclination to reopen existing ancillary relief orders and dismissed the appeal. However, their Lordships did not go so far as to rule out that a case brought as a result of the credit crunch might, in the appropriate circumstances, fall within Barder.

To read the rest of this article, see June [2009] Family Law journal.

To log on to Family Law Online or to request a free trial click here.

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