Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'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 articlesrss feeds
A seismic change in ethos and practice
Caroline Bowden, a member of the Private Family Law Early Resolution Working Group which first examined what changes were needed, looks at the effect of the revised rules on everyone working in family...
Debunking the myth about sensitivity in drug and alcohol testing
*** SPONSORED CONTENT***With all the news about deep fakes, authentication and transparency in the news at the moment, Cansford Laboratories Reporting Scientist Jayne Hazon has examined a recent...
New Family Presiding Judges Appointed
The Lady Chief Justice, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor, has announced the appointment of two Family Presiding Judges.Mr Justice MacDonald has been appointed for a period of four years,...
Victims given greater access to justice through legal aid reform
Innocent people who have suffered miscarriages of justice, personal harm or injury are among those who will benefit from upcoming changes to legal aid means testing coming into effect this...
Obligations and responsibilities – the mosquito in the bedroom
Stephen Wildblood KC, 3PB BarristersLuke Nelson, 3PB BarristersWhatever happened to ‘obligations and responsibilities’ in s 25(2) MCA 1973?  Why is it that all of the other words in...
View all articles
Authors

No Second Bite of the Cherry

Sep 29, 2018, 16:33 PM
Title : No Second Bite of the Cherry
Slug : no-second-bite-of-the-cherry
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Jul 27, 2007, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 85423

Dennis North, 70, appealed against a district judge's decision in 2006 to award a lump sum of £202,000 from his retirement fund to his ex-wife, Jean North, whom he divorced in 1978. Mrs North, 64, had left him and their three children for another man and the couple had come to a financial settlement which gave Mrs North a 'reasonable' lifestyle. When her finances took a turn for the worse, partly as a result of her own 'lifestyle choices' she returned to the county court to vary the terms of the original order. That was later upheld in the High Court. The Court of Appeal ruled on 25 July that the second award was 'fundamentally flawed'. Mrs North might still be due 'some modest award' from her former husband, but it would not approach the six-figure sum that she had previously been granted: 'The prodigal former wife cannot hope to turn to a former husband in pursuit of a legal remedy, whatever may be her hope that he might, out of charity, come to her rescue.' The Court stated that she might still be entitled to 'some modest award' which will be decided at the end of July. For further information see September [2007] Fam Law.

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