Gohil v Gohil (No 2): CA 13 Mar 2014

The parties had agreed financial provision on their divorce, but W subsequently discovered what she said was material non-disclosure by H. The court was now asked whether a court of first instance had jurisdiction to set aside a final financial relief order.
Held: H’s appeal against such an order succeeded. A first instance judge did not have such a jurisdiction where the only basis was that evidence was available which would be admissible before the Court of Appeal applying their guidelines.
Arden, Pitchford, McFarlane LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 274, [2014] WLR(D) 126, [2014] 3 WLR 717, [2014] 2 FCR 455, [2014] Fam Law 1103, [2015] Fam 89, [2015] 1 FLR 178
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedLadd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
Appeal fromGohil v Gohil FD 25-Sep-2012
The parties had divorced and financial relief settled. W now applied to have the order set aside on the grounds of alleged serious material non-disclosure, fraud and misrepresentation by the husband. W had attended his later trial and obtained much . .
See AlsoCrown Prosecution Service and Another v Gohil CA 26-Nov-2012
The CPS had obtained evidence through letters of request. Mr and Mrs Gohil had previously divorced and reached a financial settlement. The evidence apparently disclosed further substantial assets which W said had not been disclosed in the settlement . .

Cited by:
CitedCS v ACS and Another FD 16-Apr-2015
Rule Against Appeal was Ultra Vires
W had applied to have set aside the consent order made on her ancillary relief application accusing the husband of material non-disclosure. She complained that her application to have the order varied had been refused on the ground that her only . .
Appeal fromGohil v Gohil SC 14-Oct-2015
The Court was asked ‘Do the principles referable to the admissibility of fresh evidence on appeal, as propounded in the decision of the Court of Appeal in Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489, have any relevance to the determination of a spouse’s . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 December 2020; Ref: scu.522394