header-logo header-logo

19 June 2015
Issue: 7657 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Return of the divorced

Recovering economy spurs rise in claims for more money

The number of divorced people returning to court to claim more money from their ex has more than doubled in the past year.

Some 29,060 people made a post-divorce financial claim in 2014, compared to 14,690 people in 2013, according to figures collected by law firm Hugh James.

The reason many ex-spouses return to court is that couples often fail to obtain a court order to formalise their financial agreement when they divorce, for example, where they reach their own informal settlement, according to Hugh James. Without this order, an ex can bring a new claim even years after their marriage was dissolved. Earlier this year, for example, the impoverished ex-wife of the multi-millionaire founder of Ecotricity brought a claim against him more than 20 years after they divorced, even though he was a penniless hippy living in a van during their marriage, in Wyatt v Vince [2015] UKSC 14.

During the recession, couples often preferred to make an informal division of assets in order to keep costs down. The number of claims brought outside the divorce process also dipped, to just 3,620 in 2011. Without a binding legal agreement, however, there is no time limit on one partner pursuing a further financial claim.

Meanwhile, the recovering economy has made such disputes more likely.

Charlotte Leyshon, associate at Hugh James, says: “The final step of having an agreement reached through mediation or arbitration formalised and adopted as a court order is crucial.

“Failure to do so leaves the door open to an unexpected future financial claim. Claims over pensions are a common reason for ex-spouses going back to court after a divorce. Since they are complex and not always relevant to immediate financial needs, they often don’t get the attention they should.”

 
Issue: 7657 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll