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
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
Focusing on behaviour and attitudes of separating parents
I am sure that if this year's Family Law Awards were an in-person event as usual, rather than this year’s virtual occasion, much of the chatter among family law professionals would be...
View all articles
Authors

FINANCIAL REMEDIES: Davies v Davies [2012] EWCA Civ 1641

Sep 29, 2018, 18:35 PM
Slug : financial-remedies-davies-v-davies-2012-ewca-civ-1641
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 20, 2012, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 101195

(Court of Appeal, Thorpe, Elias, Rimer LJJ, 11 December 2012)

The husband sought to appeal the order granting the wife a lump sum of £2.2m in addition to the final matrimonial home. The husband proposed she should be entitled to a lump sum of £1.5m.

During proceedings the husband, who owned a hotel business, claimed that the wife had worked as no more than a receptionist intermittently throughout the marriage. The wife however, contended that the status of the business had risen dramatically due to her input.

The judge preferred the evidence of the wife and held that her contribution to the increase in the family's net worth was exceptional. However, the valuations provided on behalf of both the husband and wife were not in agreement.

The judge had fallen into error in effectively finding the business was of no value at the date of his acquisition however the ultimate result was not infected by that error.

Permission to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

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