H appealed against an order adjusting the shares in the matrimonial home in favour of W.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The adjustment had been made without any particular rationale. Though H did stand to inherit, his mother was in robust health and was free to leave her asstes elsewhere if she wished. It remained significant also the W’s fortune was also derived from H’s family.
Pension expectations should be based upon what had been created during the marriage, and not on any prospective valuation. Capital awards should be made only on evidence.
Judges:
Thorpe J
Citations:
[1993] 2 FLR 335
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Thomas v Thomas CA 2-May-1995
H was a wealthy businessman, but, as a member of Lloyds, he had been required to charge the family home to secure potential liabilities. Also, the company of which he was managing director had always paid out only smaller sums by way of dividends, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.551327
