Show all posts by user
This is a UK based forum about divorce and related issues. Feel free to contribute. Your experiences or opinions may help others. The link to the home page on the left leads to basic information about most common divorce questions. You can use the search function to search the forum
Re: Final hearing - 4 days ago
They were entitled to submit questions in a questionnaire or questionnaires approved by the court. If you have answered those questions you are not obliged to answer endless continuing questions in correspondence. That is the whole point of court approved questionnaires. It is designed to prevent never ending interrogation (and the cost that incurs). Of course, it can also be a matter of commoby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 11 days ago
That is the sort of thing that people are cross examined upon when they give evidence. Proper cross examination and closing submissions is how these things are tackled.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 13 days ago
One week before a hearing is not unreasonable. You should keep copies of your correspondence saying you were ready to exchange so that you can produce it if there is an issue about the timing of disclosure on the day.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Court Fees Unable To Be Paid - 20 days ago
The general rule in this type of litigation is that each side pays their own costs. No-one can count on getting their costs paid by the other side. Costs are taken into account as a liability in assessing each side's financial circumstances but since costs on both sides often of broadly similar amounts they tend to cancel one another out (although not always).by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 27 days ago
An exhibit is something like this. Statement, 'I have a broken arm. (Exhibit 1)'. Exhibit 1: X-ray of broken arm. In your case I think the other side is going to be responsible for preparing and paginating the bundle so you just need to make sure that documents you want included are included.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Major Divorce Issue - 5 weeks ago
The fact is that she can't get the divorce annulled simply because she didn't know about it. People can get a divorce based on five years' separation even when the other spouse cannot be found, let alone served with the papers. That is not the test. The test is whether every reasonable effort was made to locate the other spouse and to serve the papers. Sometimes there are good reasby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Major Divorce Issue - 5 weeks ago
I think I can lay your mind to rest about bigamy. So far as you (and a court) were concerned you did obtain a divorce before remarrying. Unless it can be shown that you deceived the court and deliberately obtained a divorce by fraudulent means it is extremely unlikely you would be prosecuted for bigamy (let alone receive any significant sentence). On the issue of whether you should get the oriby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Captalised spousal maintenance - 6 weeks ago
All your numbered points are valid. I doubt that any court would compel you to pay capitalised maintenance under these circumstances so if you can't afford to pay it and you don't want to (for the good reasons that you have given) then just say, 'No'.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Trying to avoid a Pension Sharing order - 6 weeks ago
>>My concern was that the court would review the agreement and ask for evidence to support the amount to be paid, or with a sum this low are they simply going to accept it as part of a clause in the financial order?<< Obviously if there is a disparity of pension provision a court will consider how that is addressed. And there is space on the fiinancial form which accompanies a consby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Trying to avoid a Pension Sharing order - 6 weeks ago
Well, I am not sure they need to do that. Obviously they can if they want but the difference in pension values here seems to be £57,888.88 (which presumably fluctuates almost daily). A cash equivalent would not be half (£28,944.44) for the reasons I have already explained so we are talking about a figure probably nearer £20,000. That is not really a life changing sum. Many people do agree on theby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Trying to avoid a Pension Sharing order - 6 weeks ago
>>The difference is £57,888.88. Is it reasonable for my friend to request half of that amount as a cash payout and leave both pensions intact? No, it isn't. Money in a pension is not equivalent to cash. If you doubt that then consider that pensions suddenly became worth a lot less when Trump announced 'Liberation Day'. That can happen to pensions at any time quite apart fby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 7 weeks ago
No. The test of whether documents should be included in a trial bundle is whether they are relevant for the issues that the court has to decide. And there are separate summary documents in the court bundle which tell the court what issues it has to decide and what each side says about those issues. It very much depends what the issues are. If one side says (s)he is aged 61 and the other says 59 (by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 7 weeks ago
>>How can i go about asking the other party what i want included in trial bundle ? Just write to them and say you want X,Y and Z included. If they refuse any or all then they will give reasons and you can argue giving your reasons.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 7 weeks ago
It is impossible to say without knowing the exact details. It depends upon such things as the amount involved, to what extent the money could properly be regarded as matrimonial, the reason it was spent, whether you have also spent some of the matrimonial assets, whether it is necessary to add such money back in in order to achieve fairness/meet reasonable needs etc.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Costs orders - 8 weeks ago
>>should I have to pay the other side's costs for time spent on the sale process I believe I have already answered that. It was legitimate and necessary for your ex's solicitor to determine how and according to what timescale the property could be sold. The court will have wanted to know how, in what way and when the property could be sold so your ex's solicitors needed toby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 2 months ago
>>is it a brand new separate bundle for final hearing ? It is usually, yes, because the basis of the two hearings is different although there is inevitably some overlap. >>I would like to add some stuff unto the bundle (example rolex receipt and my email communication with rolex store ) Does the other side need to agree ? What happens if they don’t agree ?<< Assuming iby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Costs orders - 2 months ago
>>I told my ex her solicitor should not be engaging with the property professionals in relation to the sale (in a foreign jurisdiction) and therefore I would ask the judge to exclude any element that related to the solicitor's time spent on doing so. I have spent time arguing that my ex should not have a role in the disposal of the asset because it was awarded to me and because she noby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: House repair - 2 months ago
>>Can I just ask the sale to go ahead as soon as a consent order is agreed?<< No. I think you misunderstand what a consent order is. It is an order made by consent - ie with your agreement as well as hers. If you do not want to agree to a sale in 2027 or whatever then don't agree to it and there cannot be a 'consent' order on those terms. The only things which can goby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Costs orders - 2 months ago
The problem you have with preparing your own schedule of costs is that it seems that the action is about enforcing an arbitration award/order against you so it is hard to see upon what basis you could possibly be asking that the other side pays your costs. Possibly there is some reason of which I am unaware (such as that you offered in writing to meet your ex's claim before they issued theirby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Costs orders - 2 months ago
It is impossible to say without knowing the details. The solicitor is correct in the sense that in the financial proceedings arising from divorce it is normal for each side to pay their own costs rather than one side being ordered to pay the other side's costs. However, where there is some degree of fault it is also normal for the party in default to be ordered to pay the other side's cby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Judge rejected D81/S25 - 2 months ago
I can't say I was able to read this post but judges do not simply rubber stamp things which have agreed. They have to look at the surrounding circumstances - as set out in the accompanying D81 form - and consider those in deciding whether the proposed agreement is fair. And it has to be pointed out that the factors a court must take into account in deciding whether it is fair or not are setby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 2 months ago
Do remember that a barrister's role (at least in this type of case) is to represent a client in court NOT to attend to the paperwork which is presented to the court. It is a solicitor who normally deals with the latter. I say this because even the most gifted footballer can be handicapped by having to use a deflated ball. You do need to bear this in mind. A barrister is likely to be of onlyby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Child maintenance after clean break - 2 months ago
If you have no contact details and no details of income it is hard to see how a court can assess what child maintenance would be payable, if any, and that is before you even get to problems about enforcement as a result of the lack of contact details. Also, of course, a person against whom an application is made should receive notice of the application so he can respond to it. You have a number oby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Child maintenance after clean break - 2 months ago
Bearing in mind that it was a court order which specified that no child maintenance was to be paid it is not obvious that a court would order child maintenance one year later. Of course, it might but there were no doubt reasons for the original order which you apparently agreed to. Dpending on the other terms of the order it may also be possible for the non-resident parent to counter claim that oby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Divorce flowchart - 3 months ago
Notice the 20 week 'cooling off' period and the 6 week delay before one can apply for decree absolute. If one or both spouses think the marriage is over and have gone as far as issuing an application for divorce one has to ask who benefits from a minimum delay of half a year. And, of course, you can't even apply for divorce within 12 months of getting married.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 4 months ago
Like the barrister said, the judge did not order that mention be made of the open offer in the directions and so it is quite properly not included in the draft order. However, you have the barrister's letter to refer to when it comes to including the open offer in the final trial bundle. The normal costs order in this type of case is that each side pays their own so if your ex is travelliby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Final hearing - 4 months ago
'Costs reserved' means that the issue of who pays what costs is to be left to the final hearing. As to any open offers whether that was to be included in the order depends entirely upon what the judge ordered on the day.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Insecure Job during divorce - 4 months ago
>>I'm thinking more along the lines of involuntary job loss. I guess if I lost my job the court could order I carried on paying It's not so much that a court would order you to keep paying. Rather it is that if a court orders spousal maintenance and the person paying loses his job (it is almost invariably a 'he') then the person paying has to apply to the court to varby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Insecure Job during divorce - 4 months ago
>>Perhaps I'm incorrect but a sum based on ability to pay sounds more flexible than a promise to pay. No, you are correct. Mind you, spousal maintenance ordered by a court does not reduce automatically if the income of the person paying falls. Any reduction has either to be agreed with the recipient or application has to be made to the court to vary and such an application takes timby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: FDR - 4 months ago
Remember that if you reach agreement before a final hearing that hearing becomes unnecessary. Often people do reflect on what a judge has said at an FDR and make suitably adjusted offers. Negotiations don't have to end just because there was no agreement at an FDR. In fact it is often the case that one or both parties only receive a realistic assessment of the likely outcome at an FDR. I havby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum