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
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
Authors

ANCILLARY RELIEF: S v S (Ancillary Relief After Lengthy Separation) [2006] EWHC 2339 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 16:30 PM
Slug : s-v-s-ancillary-relief-after-lengthy-separation-2006-ewhc-2339-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 22, 2006, 08:46 AM
Article ID : 85225

(Family Division; Singer J; 22 September 2006)

The ancillary relief hearing took place over 10 years after the divorce. The marriage had lasted for over 18 years. The husband had owned the business before the divorce, but had subsequently developed it without any form of support or contribution from the wife. There had been a very significant disagreement between the experts as to the correct valuation for the husband's company, the husband's valuer suggesting £3.73m, the wife's valuer suggesting £27.2m. The company had been in difficulties in recent years, and flotation or sale would only be possible after considerable further effort by the husband.

The length of the separation and the current state of company made it unfair for the wife to ask for a share in the potential of the husband's company. The husband was ceding to the wife the current tangible wealth and enhancing her pension fund so as to achieve equality, while at the same time assuming the whole of the risk. Although assets were to be valued as at the date of hearing rather than at the date of separation, what happened in the intervening years could be very significant. In this case the value of the husband's shares was more akin to non-matrimonial property, however, the shares had been given weight in the balancing exercise by having regard both to the approximate value of the husband's separation-date holding of shares and to his contribution to the generation of wealth unmatched by the wife.

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