Non-disclosing husband fails in challenge to Court of Appeal

A husband who failed to disclose all of his assets has failed in his appeal to set aside an order.

Mr Moher appealed a financial remedy order made in May 2018 on the grounds that he should not have to pay periodical payments to his wife until a Jewish Get, the Hebrew word for a divorce document, was granted.

Mr Moher also claimed the judge erred by failing to quantify the extent of the husband’s non-disclosure and the calculation of the lump sum awarded to Mrs Moher was wrong and that the lump sum was far more than she needed.

The Court of Appeal has now dismissed the husband’s grounds of appeal and has ordered Mr Moher to continue periodical payments to Mrs Moher until he grants her a Get.

It was determined that the Court should try to assess the extent of the financial resources of the non-disclosing party but this does not mean the Court must put a specific figure or bracket on the value of the non-disclosed assets, as sometimes this will be impossible.

The Court of Appeal has also made the important confirmation that in Jewish cases the court has jurisdiction to make orders for maintenance payments to wives pending obtaining a Get.

Since a Jewish marriage is entered into by a legal contract between a man and woman, it can only be terminated by a legal document ending that original contract. In Jewish practice, only a rabbinical court can dissolve a marriage between a married couple.

The Court also decided that there was a compelling need for a "clean break" between the parties so that they would be able to make "new lives". This was based on the manner in which the husband had behaved, including that he had been convicted for assault and harassment of the wife.