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...
Latest articles
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
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...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
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....
View all articles

Flipside of Myerson v Myerson

Sep 29, 2018, 17:22 PM
The Court of Appeal has ruled a West Yorkshire woman cannot claim more after her ex-husband's shares quadrupled in value.
Slug : flipside-of-myerson-v-myerson
Meta Title : Flipside of Myerson v Myerson
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 26, 2009, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 89627

The Court of Appeal has ruled a West Yorkshire woman cannot claim more after her ex-husband's shares quadrupled in value.

Kim Walkden, 47, originally received a cash settlement totalling £482,000 in 2006, mainly based on the £800,000 value placed on her husband's share of the timber company Triesse and was also awarded maintenance of £1,100 a month.

However, Mrs Walkden sought to renegotiate her divorce settlement from her former husband, Martin, after the timber company was sold for more than £3.7 million in 2007.

Her lawyers argued that as a result of the higher value, Mr Walkden's share of the couple's assets had risen to 82% from 58% while Mrs Walkden's share had fallen from 42% to 18%.

In June last year, Mrs Walkden was given permission at York County Court to seek a renegotiation of the original settlement.

Mr Walkden, 47, won his appeal yesterday on the ground that his situation was no different from that of the Brian Myerson, whose attempt to renegotiate his £9.5m divorce settlement on the grounds that the recession had badly affected his finances was rejected by the court of appeal in April.

Lord Justice Thorpe, sitting with Lord Justice Wall and Lord Justice Elias, said none of the legal requirements that would allow Mrs Walkden to reopen the hearing over division of assets had been met.

He added that he was handing down his judgment because the issues in the case "were of some general importance".

Lord Justice Wall, noted that Mrs Walkden had reached an agreement with her former husband whereby her maintenance payments were converted to a capital sum and the couple had now achieved a clean break.

The judge said the case could be described "as the flipside of the decision of this court in Myerson v Myerson".

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