All your resources at your fingertips.Learn More
(Family Division; Moylan J)
The general proposition that the marital partnership did not stay alive for the purpose of sharing future resources unless that was justified by need or by compensation did not require the court considering financial relief to define what was and what was not matrimonial property. The weight to be given to the fact that some assets had accrued since separation was a matter for the court's discretion. Future earning capacity was one of the express factors listed in s 25(2) of Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, so could not be ignored. The wife was awarded £8.4 million, over half the total assets, as justified by reference to her needs.
Get a FREE trial today! The fastest way to access the latest law reports, case law, commentary,...