Family court rules on financial remedy order misrepresentation

Family Court rules on financial remedy order misrepresentation

The Family Court, sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, delivered a significant ruling regarding an application to set aside a financial remedy order due to alleged misrepresentation by the respondent husband. The case, heard by Sir Jonathan Cohen, involved the financial arrangements following the divorce of the parties referred to as A (the applicant wife) and M (the respondent husband).

The primary issue in the case was the husband's application to strike out the wife's application to set aside a financial remedy order made by Mostyn J on 25 January 2022. The wife alleged that the order was based on the husband's misrepresentation regarding the timeline of a private equity fund in which he had an interest.

During the original proceedings in October 2021, the court had determined the wife's share of the husband's interest in the equity fund based on the fund's anticipated closure date. However, it later emerged that the fund's closure date was misrepresented, leading to an under-calculation of the wife's share.

The husband admitted that his evidence to the court was inaccurate, attributing the error to incorrect information from his professional advisors. The wife argued that the husband must have known the true situation, especially by the time of the trial.

The court was tasked with deciding whether the wife's application to set aside the order constituted an abuse of process. The husband argued that the wife should have brought her application earlier and that her delay caused unnecessary litigation and expense.

Sir Jonathan Cohen weighed the competing factors, acknowledging that while the wife should have acted sooner, the husband's misrepresentation resulted in an unjust financial outcome for the wife. The court ultimately decided not to strike out the wife's application, allowing her to pursue the correction of the financial order.

The judgment emphasised the importance of finality in litigation but recognised the necessity of addressing errors that result from misleading information. The court also highlighted the potential for mediation to resolve the dispute amicably.

This case underscores the complexities involved in financial remedy proceedings and the court's role in ensuring fairness and accuracy in the division of assets following divorce.

Learn More

Explore essential areas of UK employment law, including contracts, workplace policies, and discrimination.

Copyright & permissions