EL v ML
[2023] EWFC 43 (B)
TM v AM
8 November 2023
[2023] EWFC 247 (B)
Family Court
A husband tried to overturn a divorce agreement, claiming his wife hid a huge diamond. But the court didn't believe him because the evidence showed the husband's story was wrong, and he waited too long to challenge the agreement. So the original agreement stayed in place.
Key Facts
- •Husband applied to set aside a consent order made on 18 November 2021.
- •Husband alleged the wife materially non-disclosed ownership of a £2 million diamond ring.
- •Husband also alleged discrepancies in the wife's financial disclosure (D81 forms).
- •Wife denied knowledge of the diamond.
- •An auctioneer, initially claiming to have sold the diamond, admitted fabricating the story.
- •The court reviewed evidence including witness statements, emails, and a video.
- •Husband accessed wife's private emails without authorization.
Legal Principles
Applications to set aside consent orders must be made within 28 days unless a valid explanation for delay is provided.
Case law and Family Court procedure
The burden of proof in civil cases is on the balance of probabilities.
Civil Procedure Rules
Witness demeanour should hold little weight in assessing the veracity of evidence.
Lord Leggatt's speech (November 2022)
Outcomes
Husband's application to set aside the consent order was dismissed.
The court found no evidence to support the husband's claims of material non-disclosure regarding the diamond or significant discrepancies in financial information. The discrepancies found were deemed minor and inconsequential.
The auctioneer's evidence was deemed unreliable and his story about the diamond was found to be fabricated.
The auctioneer admitted to lying to generate interest in his business, and the court relied on video evidence showing the diamond's journey, contradicting the auctioneer's claims.
Husband's unauthorized access to wife's emails was noted and implicitly criticized.
The actions were deemed improper and did not provide credible evidence supporting the husband's case.