Ansari v Ansari and others: CA 19 Dec 2008

The wife had registered her right of occupation under the 1996 Act, but the husband sold the house subject to the registered right, and the purchaser had charged the property. She now sought an order restricting the use of the proceeds of sale, and challenged the new mortgage.
Held: The wife’s appeal failed. The subsection should not be used to set aside a subsequent disposition where the party was not party to any conspiracy or had notice of any intention to defeat the wife’s rights: ‘The discretion conferred by sub-section (3), even if it can be used to set aside dispositions subsequent to the first disposition in a case where the parties acted in bad faith, should certainly not be used to set aside a subsequent disposition for valuable consideration to a person who acted in relation to it in good faith and without such notice.’

Longmore LJ, Wilson LJ, Lawrence Collins LJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 1456
Bailii, Times
Family Law Act 1996 30
England and Wales
Not appliedGreen v Green 1981
Section section 37(3) of the 1983 Act was not wide enough in its terms to enable a judge to set aside a disposition granted by someone other than the husband or wife. That was because sub-section 3 only enabled a judge to give directions . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Land

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.278972