Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

SS v RS

16 March 2023
[2023] EWFC 32
Family Court
A husband tried to get money from his ex-wife after she finally removed him from their old house's mortgage. The judge said he had no legal right to the money and had to pay his ex-wife some of her legal costs for making the case.

Key Facts

  • Husband (H) applied for sale of marital home, £80,000 compensation, and contact with building society regarding his credit record.
  • Wife (W) applied for a penal notice and to strike out H's application.
  • A 2019 financial remedy order transferred the home to W, with an undertaking to release H from the mortgage and indemnify him.
  • W eventually released H from the mortgage in January 2023.
  • H claimed compensation for W's alleged failure to release him earlier, citing the Domestic Abuse Act 2021.
  • H claimed economic abuse due to his impaired credit rating affecting his ability to obtain a mortgage and higher interest on loans.
  • H's application had a lengthy history due to procedural issues and successful appeals.

Legal Principles

Domestic Abuse Act 2021 does not provide for financial compensation.

Domestic Abuse Act 2021

Indemnity clause in the 2019 order only covers liability under the legal charge, not wider economic losses.

2019 Financial Remedy Order

Compensation in financial remedy cases is exceptionally rare, typically limited to specific circumstances as in McFarlane.

Miller; McFarlane [2006] 1 FLR 1186

Outcomes

H's application for sale of the home and compensation was struck out.

H's claim under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 was misconceived, and his claim for compensation based on the indemnity clause was misconstrued. No independent claim for economic loss exists.

No order for compensation was made.

The court lacks the power to award compensation in these circumstances.

A recital was included in the order regarding H's credit rating and W's mortgage responsibilities.

To record the facts without impacting on the substantive issues.

H was ordered to pay £5,400 towards W's costs.

H's unreasonable refusal to withdraw his application after being released from the mortgage.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.