The wife sued for arrears of maintenance payments payable under a deed in consideration for which the wife covenanted not to proceed with the prayers in the petition for maintenance, to consent to their being dismissed, and not to present any further petition for maintenance. The court was asked whether the whole or main consideration moving from the plaintiff wife was a promise or promises purporting to oust the jurisdiction of the court.
Held: Because the agreement was of no effect, it was not consideration for her husband’s agreement and her claim failed. Somervell LJ said: ‘The point here is that the consideration moving from her was a promise not to exercise her right to apply to the court.’ That being the sole or main consideration the covenant sought to be enforced by the wife was void and unenforceable.
Somervell LJ
[1952] 1 KB 249
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Soulsbury v Soulsbury CA 10-Oct-2007
The claimant was the first wife of the deceased. She said that the deceased had promised her a substantial cash sum in his will in return for not pursuing him for arrears of maintenance. The will made no such provision, and she sought payment from . .
Cited – Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino SC 20-Oct-2010
The parties, from Germany and France married and lived at first in England. They had signed a pre-nuptial agreement in Germany which would have been valid in either country of origin. H now appealed against a judgment which bound him to it, . .
Cited – Alec Lobb (Garages) Ltd v Total Oil Ltd CA 1985
The court was asked whether the terms of a lease and lease back amounted to an unconscionable bargain and was unenforceable.
Held: The court affirmed the decision at first instance, but emphasised the need for unconscientious behaviour rather . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family
Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.259829
