header-logo header-logo

17 February 2017
Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Mortgage release out of order

The draft “Mostyn” financial remedies order provides for the court to actually order a party to procure mortgage release and to indemnify. By virtue of what authority can the court do this? Also, is it essential for a child periodical payments order to apportion maintenance between more than one child rather than just order a global sum?

The High Court powers given to the family court by Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, s 31E(1) may enable it to order one party to indemnify the other, but there is no authority for making an order requiring release from a mortgage. On the contrary, the Court of Appeal has expressed the view that the court is not able to order a party to secure release from a mortgage: see Birch v Birch [2015] EWCA Civ 833, [2015] All ER (D) 34 (Aug). The position should be covered by an undertaking and the order should make provision for enforcement in the event of non-compliance.

An order for periodical payments may be made in a global sum to or for the benefit of more than one child,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll