Cambridge Family Law Practice

A wife who failed to obey family court orders has been awarded a smaller financial settlement as a reflection of her poor conduct during the court proceedings.

 

The case concerned a couple who separated in December 2021, after a five-and-a-half-year marriage. The husband, 37, and the wife, 36, had three children. They had agreed on shared care arrangements, but could not agree on financial matters.

 

By the time the case came before the High Court, there had been no less than six hearings on the latter issue. No progress was made at the first two hearings as the wife failed to complete the standard Form E, on which each party to a divorce is required to make a full disclosure of their financial assets. At the third hearing, the wife did submit a Form E, but it was late and did not include sufficient documentation.

 

The Financial Dispute Resolution (FDR) hearing was adjourned twice, but the wife did not attend either rescheduled appointment, in the first instance claiming she was unable to, and in the second saying she was unaware of the planned hearing. The family court made a fresh financial disclosure order against the wife, with a penalty notice attached. But again, the wife did not attend the hearing that followed.

 

The Judge decided to proceed with the scheduled final hearing anyway. Recorder Chandler KC declared that:

 

“I am satisfied that the Wife has engaged in serious litigation misconduct and has failed to give full and frank disclosure of her financial position, i.e. …Her Form E was deficient, and she had failed to attach all of the necessary documents…The wife failed to attend for the hearings on 15 May 2023, 4 December 2023, 1 February 2024 and 17 June 2024…She has failed to provide the required disclosure and has breached the penal notices made on 15 May 2023, 4 December 2023, 1 February 2024 and 17 June 2024…”

 

In recognition of this behaviour, the couple’s assets were divided on the basis of the husband receiving 66.5 per cent of the couple’s assets and the wife only 33.5 per cent.

 

Recorder Chandler explained that:

 

“I here take into account the Wife’s litigation misconduct which has significantly added to the duration and expense of this case. As I have noted earlier there have been three ineffective FDR hearings and this final hearing is the seventh hearing, due in large part to the Wife’s failure to comply with orders.”

 

Tricia Ashton, one of the partners here at Cambridge Family Law Practice, notes that “this case is not the first to highlight the fact that the court does take a dim view of non-compliance with court orders, and that – whilst not always – it will penalise a party who repeatedly, and without justification, does not adhere to the rules”.

 

Read the full case here.