Key Facts
- •Wife (A) filed for divorce in March 2023, alleging conduct amounting to coercive and controlling behavior by husband (R).
- •A's allegations included invasion of privacy, accessing privileged information, undermining A's career, and financial misconduct.
- •R denied all allegations.
- •The court held a case management hearing to determine whether A's conduct claim should proceed to trial.
- •The parties' cumulative legal costs related to the conduct issue reached £78,417.
- •The matrimonial assets were approximately £2.12 million (excluding pensions).
Legal Principles
In financial remedy proceedings, conduct must be of a 'high degree of exceptionality' to be considered; it must be 'both obvious and gross' and have an identifiable financial impact.
Wachtel v Wachtel [1973] Fam 72, Miller v Miller [2006] UKHL 24, OG v AG [2020] EWFC 52, N v J [2024] EWFC 184
The court must consider the proportionality of litigating conduct allegations, balancing the potential impact on the outcome against the costs and resources involved.
FPR 2010 1.1, 1.4; Tsvetkov v Khayrova [2023] EWFC 130
Even if conduct meets the threshold, it must be material to the outcome of the financial remedy proceedings. The court can reach a fair outcome using the other s.25 criteria without considering conduct.
N v J [2024] EWFC 184
The court's role is not to provide personal vindication or apportion blame, but to achieve a fair financial distribution.
N v J [2024] EWFC 184
Outcomes
A's conduct claim was excluded from further consideration.
The allegations, even if proven, did not meet the high threshold for conduct; the potential financial impact was not significant enough to justify the disproportionate costs of litigating the issue; a fair financial settlement could be reached without considering the conduct allegations.