Key Facts
- •Male civil partners, N (Applicant) and J (Respondent), in financial remedy proceedings.
- •N alleges J's conduct (lying about paid sexual encounters) caused N's mental health deterioration, impacting his needs.
- •Assets are approximately £32 million.
- •N's Form E reserved its position on conduct.
- •High degree of contentiousness in the litigation.
- •J made an open offer of approximately £5 million to N.
- •N seeks £16 million (50% of assets) or more based on the sharing principle and needs.
Legal Principles
Conduct in financial remedy proceedings must be of a highly exceptional nature to be considered; it must be 'both obvious and gross'.
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s25(2)(g); Civil Partnership Act 2004, Schedule 5, para 21(2)(g); Wachtel v Wachtel [1973] Fam 72; Miller; McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24
Conduct, including domestic abuse, must have a direct financial impact on resources or other s25 criteria (e.g., increased needs) to be considered.
OG v AG [2020] EWFC 52; Various cases cited in paragraphs 31-32
The court must actively manage conduct allegations at the earliest stage, potentially excluding them if the exceptionality threshold isn't met or it's disproportionate to litigate.
FPR 2010, r 1.1, 1.4; Tsvetkov v Khayrova [2023] EWFC 130
Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and PD12J are contextually relevant but don't alter the statutory definition of conduct in financial remedies.
Domestic Abuse Act 2021, s1; Practice Direction 12J
Outcomes
N's conduct claim against J is excluded from consideration at trial.
Even assuming N's allegations are true, they don't meet the exceptionality threshold for conduct. The causal link between J's infidelity and N's mental health deterioration is not 'obvious' given N's pre-existing mental health issues and other contributing factors. There's no material financial impact beyond increased medical costs, which are considered under N's needs regardless of cause. Litigating the conduct claim is disproportionate given the complexity and costs.