In the case of UD v TQ [2024] EWFC 119 (B), the Central Family Court, presided over by His Honour Judge Edward Hess, issued a comprehensive ruling on financial remedies following the divorce of a high-earning professional footballer (TQ) and his wife (UD). The judgment considered the needs of the couple's child, BD, and addressed issues of asset division, spousal and child maintenance, and the husband's non-disclosure of financial information. The court ordered significant financial provisions for the wife, including a lump sum payment of £105,000 and ongoing periodical payments. The husband's litigation conduct and lack of engagement significantly impacted the outcome.
Case Overview
Court: Central Family Court
Case Number: 1684-5078-3981-6001
Judgment Date: 26th April 2024
Neutral Citation: [2024] EWFC 119 (B)
Presiding Judge: His Honour Judge Edward Hess
Legal Issues
Non-Disclosure of Financial Assets: The husband failed to provide full financial disclosure, leading the court to draw adverse inferences regarding his wealth.
Spousal and Child Maintenance: The court assessed the financial needs of the wife and child, awarding both spousal maintenance and child support despite the husband's attempts to evade financial responsibility.
Enforcement via Attachment of Earnings: Given the husband's conduct, the court implemented an Attachment of Earnings Order to ensure compliance with the financial orders.
Court's Analysis
The court emphasized the importance of the welfare of the child, BD, while assessing the financial needs of both parties. The husband’s refusal to comply with court orders and his inadequate disclosure resulted in the court making assumptions about his financial situation. The wife was awarded a substantial lump sum and ongoing maintenance to secure her housing and support her child's needs.
Judgment Summary
Property Adjustment: The husband’s interest in the wife’s apartment was transferred to her.
Lump Sum Payment: £105,000 awarded to the wife to settle her mortgage and debts.
Spousal Maintenance: £2,000 per month until November 2027, reducing to a nominal amount thereafter.
Child Maintenance: £2,000 per month for BD, with additional provisions for educational expenses.
Legal Costs: The husband was ordered to contribute an additional £50,000 towards the wife’s legal costs due to his obstructive conduct.
Implications
This ruling underscores the court's willingness to take a firm stance against parties who fail to disclose financial information and attempt to evade their financial responsibilities post-divorce. The case highlights the importance of transparency in financial remedies proceedings and the potential consequences of non-compliance with court orders.
Komentarze