Our website is set to allow the use of cookies. For more information and to change settings click here. If you are happy with cookies please click "Continue" or simply continue browsing. Continue.

Family Law

The leading authority on all aspects of family law

10 NOV 2015

PS v RS (Financial Remedy After Foreign Divorce) [2014] EWHC 4844 (Fam)

PS v RS (Financial Remedy After Foreign Divorce) [2014] EWHC 4844 (Fam)
(Family Division, Moylan J, 1 April 2014)

Financial remedies – Foreign marriage and divorce – Parties lived in England during marriage – Substantial connection here – Whether and, if so, how, the English court should exercise its jurisdiction under s 16 of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984

Please see attached file below for full judgment.


Financial orders were made in respect of the husband and wife who were married and divorced in Egypt but who had a substantial connection with this jurisdiction for the purposes of s 16 of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984.

The Egyptian husband and wife were married in Egypt in 1996. Both now lived in England where their two children, now aged 15 and 12, were born. During the marriage the husband built up a successful GP practice and they enjoyed a good standard of living.

The marriage entered difficulties in 2010 when the husband and wife both initiated divorce proceedings in Egypt and England respectively. They briefly reconciled but divorce proceedings were once again initiated the following year. The wife claimed that during the reconciliation the husband sought to dissipate assets. In 2012 the English court declared that the marriage had been validly determined in 2011 in Egypt and the wife's petition was dismissed.

The wife was given leave to apply for financial provision pursuant to s 13 of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984. She applied for periodical payments, a lump sum order, property transfer orders and a pension sharing order.

A financial order had been made in Egypt for a minimum sum but the husband had so far failed to make payment. Orders were made by the English court on the basis that the wife would not seek to enforce the orders in Egypt.

The parties clearly had a very substantial connection with this jurisdiction and there were significant assets held here which were available for distribution. Having regard to all of the factors in s 16(2) it was entirely appropriate for the English court to make financial remedy orders and for the court to exercise its discretion as if these were purely English proceedings.

The evidence established that the husband had embarked upon a course of conduct by which he had sought to conceal assets from the wife, specifically, by transferring money to family members and purchasing property overseas in his sole name. In total it was estimated that he had concealed assets of between £800,000 and £850,000.

The wife's income was currently £19,600pa. The husband had net income of approximately £65,000pa. In total there were assets of £1.76m available for distribution. The court approached the division of assets on the basis of the sharing principle. The matrimonial property was ordered to be transferred to the wife and an additional lump sum order was made for £780,000. That award could be met by transferring the entirety of the husband's pension but he would be given the opportunity to make a lump sum payment instead. If the pension were divided equally, £385,000 each, the husband would need to pay the wife a lu,p sum of £395,000. Making some allowance for the husband's debts, the lump sum was reduced to £350,000.

In total, the wife would receive £835,000 and the husband would receive £925,000 which would give him £90,000 to put towards his debts. That was a fair division of the wealth. Periodical payments were ordered in respect of the wife of £1,800pa.
Case No. FD12F00950
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 4844 (Fam)

IN THE LEEDS COUNTY COURT

The Courthouse
1 Oxford Road
Leeds
LS1 3BG

Tuesday, 1st April 2014

Before:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MOYLAN

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

Between:

PS
Applicant

-v-

RS
Respondent

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

Transcribed from the Official Tape Recording by Apple Transcription Limited Suite 204, Kingfisher Business Centre, Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire BB4 8ES DX: 26258 Rawtenstall – Telephone: 0845 604 5642 – Fax: 01706 870838

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

The Applicant appeared in Person, assisted by a McKenzie Friend
Counsel for the Respondent: MR HENDRON

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


PS v RS (Financial Remedy After Foreign Divorce) [2014] EWHC 4844 (Fam)

JUDGMENT
Family Law Reports

Family Law Reports

"The unrivalled and authoritative source of judicially approved case reports, covering all areas...

More Info from £166.00
Available in Family Law Online
Family Law Online

Family Law Online

Get a FREE trial today! The fastest way to access the latest law reports, case law, commentary,...

Available in Family Law Online
Subscribe to our newsletters