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...
Latest articles
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
View all articles

FINANCIAL PROVISION: R v R (Financial Provision: Confiscation and Restraint Orders)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:36 PM
Slug : r-v-r-financial-provision-confiscation-and-restraint-orders
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 3, 2005, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 88691

(Family Division; Bennett J; 3 November 2005) [2006] FLR (forthcoming)

The husband was convicted in Holland of drug offences, and all his assets made the subject of confiscation and restraint orders. Following the divorce, the wife applied for financial provision.

Although the judge made a finding of fact that the wife was fully aware of the husband's substantial criminal activity, and was heavily involved, he awarded the wife a lump sum, designed to house her and the young child of the family, which drew in part upon the assets acknowledged to be tainted by the crime. The judge made a finding that there were hidden assets from which the husband could pay the confiscation order, but considered the possibility that the husband might be unable to pay the confiscation order as a result of the award to the wife and concluded that that risk was outweighed by the possibility of serious deprivation to the wife and child if a sum were awarded which was insufficient to house them. The public interest did not demand that the wrongdoing of the husband be visited upon the wife to such an extent that might imperil the welfare of the child.

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