S v S: FD 1986

Both parties sought a variation of a maintenance order. The former husband sought to be allowed to pay a sufficient capital sum to his former wife to commute the payment in her favour.
Held: Provided the sum could be paid and the result would not prejudice the arrangements for the children the variation sought by the husband should be made. The court should allow a clean break where possible.


Waite J


[1986] 1 FLR 71, [1986] 3 WLR 518


Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 31(7), Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 6


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPearce v Pearce CA 28-Jul-2003
The financial claims on divorce had been settled by a compromise recorded in a court order. The order included periodical payments to the former wife. After she suffered financial losses, she sought an increase, and the former husband sought an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186013