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
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
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...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
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,...
View all articles
Authors

Goyal v Goyal [2016] EWFC 50

Sep 29, 2018, 21:14 PM
Financial remedies – Pension sharing – Overseas pension – s24B, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
The background to this case is well known to the parties. It has been going on for far too long and so far as I can tell there is virtually no money left. A short background summary of the issues in hand can be found by the uninformed reader in the decision of the Court of Appeal dated 29 July 2016 ([2016] EWCA Civ 792), available on Bailii.
Slug : goyal-v-goyal-2016-ewfc-50
Meta Title : Goyal v Goyal [2016] EWFC 50
Meta Keywords : Financial remedies – Pension sharing – Overseas pension – s24B, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 4, 2016, 09:41 AM
Article ID : 114463

(Family Division, Mostyn J, 4 November 2016)

Financial remedies – Pension sharing – Overseas pension – s24B, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

The wife’s application for a pension-sharing order failed in limine.

In financial remedy proceedings following divorce the husband was ordered to transfer his interest in an Indian pension fund to the wife. The judge dismissed the husband’s claim that he had transferred his interest to a third party. The wife had previously been awarded a lump sum of £19,000.

The Court of Appeal set aside the pension order and directed that a rehearing should take place.

Mostyn J held that pension sharing under s 24B of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 could not be ordered in relation to a foreign pension. It was a basic rule of statutory interpretation that, although an enactment might be expressed in general terms, the area for which it was law, had to exclude territories over which Parliament lacked jurisdiction. The authorities plainly upheld the proposition that there was a presumption against extra-territoriality. The application of the presumption against the extra-territorial effect to the powers under s 24B was an inescapable reading of the legislation as a whole and was reinforced by the procedural rules applicable to pension sharing. That procedure could only work in the context of the sharing of domestic pensions.

Other routes could be adopted to achieve direct sharing of a foreign pension but the court had to be satisfied that the foreign pension provider would give effect to any agreement or consent order. In this instance the wife had not provided any evidence that a pension sharing order would be likely to be enforced in India.

The wife’s application failed in limine.


Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWFC 50
Case No: FD12D02732

IN THE FAMILY COURT

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL

04/11/2016


B e f o r e :


MR JUSTICE MOSTYN
____________________


Between:

Ankita Goyal 
Applicant

- and -


Amit Goyal
Respondent
____________________


The Applicant appeared in person
James Turner QC (instructed by Forsters LLP) appeared pro bono for the Respondent

Hearing date: 17 October 2016 
____________________

Goyal v Goyal [2016] EWFC 50

JUDGMENT
Categories :
  • Financial Remedies
  • Judgments
Tags :
FLR
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Load more comments
Comment by from