All your resources at your fingertips.Learn More
(Court of Appeal; Thorpe, Wall and Moore-Bick LJJ; 19 October 2005)  1 FLR 1114
Refusing permission to appeal in a case concerning the setting aside of a consent order, the Court of Appeal confirmed the judge's interpretation of Burns v Burns in relation to the continuing duty of disclosure: where a party had not taken up the opportunity to disclose then he could not complain about delay. The duty of promptitude on the applicant had to be measured in the context of the obligation that clearly rested on the respondent to furnish, if not detailed information, then at least the core information to enable the enquiry to be professionally evaluated. The obligation on the payer to communicate a substantial change in financial circumstances was magnified when the consent agreement included an ongoing variable element.
Order your copy today and get the Autumn Supplement