H appealed an ancillary relief order giving certain extra rights in the family property on its sale.
Held: ‘the case demonstrates that, in an ancillary relief appeal, even the most conscientious appellate judge can fall into error if, having perceived error and/or received fresh evidence, he purports to make the requisite adjustments without having first stood back and, in the light of all the circumstances including the adjustments, surveyed the effect of the order under appeal. It is sometimes easy to think that an appeal is from a judgment. But it is not; it is from an order. A judgment may have contained an error; and a change of circumstances may have invalidated some of its important assumptions. But it does not follow that the order should be set aside upon appellate review. ‘ The court stressed the need when giving judgment on an appeal against an ancillary relief order, to proffer a balance sheet of the parties’ visible net assets and of the effect of the orders which it proposes to make.
Ward LJ, Mummery LJ, Wilson LJ
[2007] EWCA Civ 1085, [2008] 1 FLR 1108
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Norris v Norris, Haskins v Haskins CA 28-Jul-2003
The court considered how orders for costs were to be made in ‘big money’ cases.
Held: There were two sets of rules. Cases should be considered by first applying the Civil Procedure Rules. This would allow the court to consider the full range . .
Cited – Charman v Charman (No 4) CA 24-May-2007
The court considered what property should be considered in an ancillary relief claim on divorce, and said: ‘To what property does the sharing principle apply? The answer might well have been that it applies only to matrimonial property, namely the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Behzadi v Behzadi CA 8-Oct-2008
W appealed against orders in ancillary relief proceedings saying that the award made to her husband was excessive. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.260198
