Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
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
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles
Authors

Joy v Joy-Morancho [2015] EWHC 2507 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 22:42 PM
​The scandalous and outrageous conduct of the husband justified a costs order of £334,263 against him in relation to the wife's costs in financial proceedings between them.
Slug : joy-v-joy-morancho-2015-ewhc-2507-fam
Meta Title : Joy v Joy-Morancho [2015] EWHC 2507 (Fam)
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 1, 2015, 02:49 AM
Article ID : 110267
(Family Division, Sir Peter Singer, 28 August 2015)

The scandalous and outrageous conduct of the husband justified a costs order of £334,263 against him in relation to the wife's costs in financial proceedings between them.

This was a very complicated case because it involved a claim from a wife on substantial and varied assets (themselves situated in several foreign jurisdictions) which were proved to have not belonged to the husband, but to a trust set up long before the marriage. During the course of the last 18 months it was systematically successfully proved during multiple hearings that none of the assets the wife was seeking to claim actually belonged to the husband and those that he did have were already encumbered. As a result the court was unable to transfer them to the wife and the learned judge has in fact awarded no capital whatsoever to the wife in this case.

Clive Joy-Morancho's lawyer,  Sofia Moussaoui, partner at DWFM Beckman, said: 

'I believe this to be a unique decision in British family law. I do not know of any other case to date where a wife who was claiming many millions of pounds was givennothing because the husband has been able to show that he does not have any assets available to him despite the tens of millions being attributed to him.

I am extremely pleased with the main thrust of the judgement which demonstrates that it is possible to refute what now seems to have become the presumption in high-net-worth family cases that a husband who claims that certain assets do not belong to him and are not available to him and the court for division, must be making a false presentation.'



Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWHC 2507 (Fam)

Case No: FD11D03744

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London WC2A 2LL

Date: 28 August 2015

Before :

Sir Peter Singer

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

Nichola Anne Joy
Applicant

- and -

Clive Douglas Christopher Joy-Morancho
First Respondent

- and -

Nautilus Fiduciary (Asia) Ltd
(the trustee of the New HuertoTrust)
Third Respondent

- and -

LCAL Anthology Inc  
Fourth Respondent

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr Richard Bates (instructed by Sears Tooth Solicitors) for the Petitioner Wife
Mr Martin Pointer QC and Mr Nicholas Wilkinson (instructed by DWFM Beckman) for the First Respondent Husband
No representative appeared for either the Third or the Fourth Respondent

Hearing dates: 27 to 31 October, 3 to 7 November, 2 and 3 December 2014, 17 and 18 June 2015

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Judgment


Joy v Joy-Morancho [2015] EWHC 2507 (Fam)
Categories :
  • Financial Remedies
  • Judgments
Tags :
FLR
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from