Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
A day in the life Of...
Read on

Goddard-Watts v Goddard-Watts [2016] EWHC 3000 (Fam)

Date:30 NOV 2016
Third slide
Law Reporter

(Family Division, Moylan J, 23 November 2016)

Financial remedies – Rehearing – Non-disclosure of interest in trusts – Whether it was possible to leave original order intact and make an additional award

The wife was awarded an additional lump sum in respect of trust assets which were not disclosed in the original financial remedy proceedings.

The husband and wife were married for 10 years and had three children together. The husband worked for and was given an interest in the family company which was later sold and the husband received £15m.

He purchased another company of which he owned 82% of the shares with the balance being held by a trust for the benefit of his children. In addition he owned shares in his brother’s company which he received in return for financial assistance.

In the first financial remedy proceedings the wife received the former matrimonial home worth £3.25m and a lump sum of £4m.

The husband was subsequently found to have given a false presentation of the trust assets and the financial order was set aside. As at June 2016 the trusts had total assets of £12.67m.

The wife submitted that she should receive an equal share of the current assets including the trust assets that had previously not been disclosed. She sought a lump sum in excess of £14m in addition to, in the event of the sale of the company, an additional sum equal to 40% of any excess value over the current value of the company.

The husband contended that the wife should receive a share of the value of the trust assets as at 2010 plus an amount to reflect that she did not receive her share at that time. He proposed a lump sum of £3.5m plus 15% compensation.

Subject to one point, the parties' resources were divided in 2010 in a way which was fair and which, remained fair. The wife received less than half of the disclosed assets but that reflects the fact that the husband’s business interests formed a significant part of the wealth retained by him. In this instance it was fair to isolate the resources which were not disclosed and to deal only with those. The current value of the business was the product of post-separation endeavour and gave the wife no entitlement to a further share in addition to that which she received in 2010.

The wife would be awarded a further sum of £6.42m representing a half share of the trust assets in addition to the outstanding lump sum that was due to her under the previous order of £280,000 and £200,000 in recognition of the fact that she should have received the additional sums in the original proceedings.

Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 3000 (Fam)
Case No: FD09D05089

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 23/11/2016

Before :


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

Between :


- and -


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

Mr Pointer QC and Mr Webster (instructed by Farrer & Co LLP) for the Applicant
Mr Amos QC and Mr Sear (instructed by Pinsent Masons LLP) for the Respondent

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

Judgment Approved

Goddard-Watts v Goddard-Watts [2016] EWHC 3000 (Fam).rtf
Financial Remedies Handbook
Financial Remedies Handbook
Formerly entitled the Ancillary Relief Handbook...
Family Law
Family Law
"the principal (monthly) periodical dealing with...
Family Court Practice, The
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition