Cambridge Family Law Practice

A wife going through a divorce has failed in her attempt to escape penalties for filing a crucial court document late.

In AB v CD, the wife had failed to file her section 25 statement by the deadline specified by the presiding Judge.

The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 is the key piece of legislation relating to divorce in England. Section 25 defines the factors that must be considered when divorcing parties’ finances under being addressed and decisions must be made regarding the division of assets. A section 25 statement is a routine part of the end of contested court proceedings. Each party to the divorce submits a statement of their views on the forthcoming financial settlement and what division of assets they believe to be fair, supposedly with reference to the ‘s25 factors’.

In this case, because the wife did not submit her statement on time, she was subject to penalties set out in the Family Procedure Rules 2010. Sitting in the Family Court at Newcastle, District Judge Dodsworth explained:

“…rule 22.10 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010…provides as follows:

22.10 If a witness statement for use at the final hearing is not served in respect of an intended witness within the time specified by the court then the witness may not be called to give oral evidence unless the court gives permission.”

He continued:

“That is a clear sanction. If you do not serve your statement on time, you cannot give evidence
without the court’s permission. It is as straightforward and as simple as that.”

The wife applied for relief from the penalties and this came before Judge Dodsworth. Her legal counsel argued that:

“The wife’s statement was filed late as the wife has had some issues with her previously instructed counsel…. The wife has repeatedly asked for information from the husband …. The husband has failed to provide this information until the week before the final hearing. The late filing of the wife’s statement has had no impact on the husband’s offer [of a particular figure] as his offer has not changed since the first [court hearing. There has been no prejudice to the husband in preparing for this trial and it has had no impact upon his section 25 statement.”

District Judge Dodsworth was unimpressed with this argument, saying:

“To call that evidence weak is, I think, describing it kindly.”

The issues raised, he declared, were neither relevant nor applicable. The Judge criticised other submitted documents, including the case bundle, which ran to more than 530 pages.

The Judge concluded:

“In this case the court set out a timetable for the service of evidence which would give each party a fair opportunity to consider the other’s statement. The Applicant’s choice to serve her evidence so late has meant that the process then becomes unfair. Accordingly, looking at this in the round, considering the particular factors set out above and all of the circumstances of the case, I refuse the application.”

Tricia Ashton, one of partners at Cambridge Family Law Practice said:

“This case is a salutary reminder of the importance of respecting the timetable and deadlines set by family court judges. Failure to do so can lead to sanctions which may have a lasting impact on the outcome.”

Read the full judgement here.