The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
ANCILLARY RELIEF: Zeiderman v Zeiderman  EWCA Civ 760
Sep 29, 2018, 17:11 PM
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article :
Prioritise In Trending Articles :
Jun 18, 2008, 04:22 AM
Article ID :87321
(Court of Appeal; Wall LJ and Sir Peter Gibson; 18 June 2008)
The court allowed the appeal against the judge's award to the wife of half the proceeds of sale of the matrimonial home, plus periodical payments of half the husband's income after deductions (£20,000 pa). The award had been based on the judge's belief that the husband was lying when he said he was not due any money from the sale of his parents' house and when he assessed his income, but there was no evidence to support this conclusion. The district judge may have given undue weight to conduct. Given that the judge's order had been made after decree nisi but before decree absolute, it was doubtful whether the judge's order had properly taken effect. The judge hearing the husband's first appeal should have admitted the husband's evidence as to his parents' property and as to his income.