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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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 - 1 year 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
Re: Insecure Job during divorce - 1 year ago
>>I'm always curious to understand how people can be leaned on to make undertakings like that. Courts can be very persuasive if they are ever put into that position. Typically it goes, 'Either you give the undertaking or I will order X'. Neither your own lawyer nor that of your opponent is in a position to do that but courts are. All a lawyer can do is say, 'If you doby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Insecure Job during divorce - 1 year ago
A court will want to secure a clean break between you to the extent that it can. It would be very reluctant to provide for a long continuing financial arrangement (apart from child maintenance). Therefore to the extent you can show your proposals meet your wife's reasonable needs it will usually be looking at something with a shorter rather than a longer duration. This is not to say that eveby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Insecure Job during divorce - 1 year ago
For what it's worth I think it very unlikely that you should be liable for the mortgage plus child maintenance plus £300. After all, maintaining children involves contributing to the cost of their accommodation so there is a certain amount of double counting going on here. Similarly the notion that your pension should be split 50/50 when the children are 18 is absurd. Who in their right sensby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: FDR - 1 year ago
Generally speaking post separation debt stays with the person who incurred it. Notice this is 'generally speaking'. There can be exceptions but it is up to the person arguing for something different to justify it.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fair divorce - 1 year ago
This is a long marriage and the husband earns more than twice as much as the wife. He gets the house. What does she get? On her income she will struggle to buy a place comparable to the one her husband lives in. Whether this arrangement is 'fair' is debatable to say the least.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fair divorce - 1 year ago
>>At least, currently, they both agree solicitors should not get involved but there have been no discussions about finances yet! I really do think Barbara should get her own legal advice as soon as possible. She does not necessarily need formally to instruct a solicitor to act on her behalf but she does need basic legal advice so that she understands what her legal position is rather thaby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: FDR - 1 year ago
It is unusual for costs to be awarded against a person at a final hearing about matrimonial finances. The usual rule is that each side pays its own costs. There are exceptions. Sometimes a court will make an order for costs against a person the court considers to have been very unreasonable in the way he/she has behaved during the litigation. This is not a routine situation. When this happens itby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fair divorce - 1 year ago
>>Can this arrangement simply be acknowledged and built into the final divorce financial agreement? It can, yes. Mind you this presupposes that the arrangement is basically fair. A court will not approve an arrangement which is unfair whether that has been 'agreed' or not.by David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: FDR - 1 year ago
>>if we agree without it reaching a final hearing- does the property adjustment order come into effect ? It takes effect when it is approved by a court and becomes a court order (by consent if agreement has been reached). This means it can come into effect at any time after it has been agreed and approved - whether at an FDR or later. A 'final hearing' becomes unnecessary underby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Pension Share remains unpaid - 1 year ago
If you had solicitors acting for you at the time then you should consult a new solicitor to examine whether you have a potential action for negligence against your former solicitor. If what actually happened is that you did not use your own solicitor but instead signed paperwork that was prepared by your ex husband's solicitor then you are in a much more difficult position. Also, it not qby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum
Re: Fair divorce - 1 year ago
Please note. The house has NOT been settled. There is no divorce let alone a final financial settlement made within that divorce. Any less formal arragement such as this is potentially capable of being re-opened. If W has pensions worth A and B and H has a pension worth X then there is no obvious reason why W should be entitled to half of X. The starting calculation would be half of A plus B plusby David Terry - UK Divorce Forum