VT v LT
[2023] EWFC 256 (B)
V v V (Financial Remedy Hearing)
6 September 2024
[2024] EWFC 255 (B)
Family Court
A couple divorced, and a judge decided how to split their money and property. There was a big argument about the value of some property in India. The judge worked out the value of everything and decided to split it fairly, even though one partner had made more money after they separated. One partner had to pay a lump sum to the other to make things even.
Key Facts
- •Financial remedy proceedings following divorce.
- •Dispute over computation of assets and their matrimonial/non-matrimonial character.
- •Assets included two UK properties, nine Indian properties (mix of residential, commercial, and agricultural land), and various bank accounts and investments.
- •Disagreement on the valuation of Indian properties and the extent to which they should be included in the distribution.
- •Respondent's inheritance from his aunt, including a property in India and £60,000, transferred to his sister.
- •Applicant is a teacher, Respondent was in IT but made redundant; Respondent operated two businesses.
- •Parties agreed on a clean break.
Legal Principles
Fair outcome considering sharing, needs, and compensation principles.
Section 25 Matrimonial Causes Act
Clean break orders unless undue hardship.
Matrimonial Causes Act
Non-matrimonial assets generally not shared unless needs dictate otherwise.
Case law (not specified)
Treatment of income and assets accrued post-separation; consideration of passive growth and source of resources.
Case law (not specified)
Outcomes
Valuation of assets and determination of matrimonial/non-matrimonial character.
Judge resolved disputes regarding valuations, applying expert valuations where appropriate and rejecting speculative or unsupported alternative valuations.
Distribution of assets: 50% share to Applicant, accounting for existing assets and liabilities.
Considering the sharing principle, needs, and contributions of both parties; a 50/50 split adjusted to reflect that the applicant would receive her own assets and the respondent would receive his own assets
Lump sum payment from Respondent to Applicant (£233,960).
To achieve an equitable distribution of assets after accounting for existing assets held and liabilities of the Applicant, reflecting the various factors mentioned in Sections 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act
Pension sharing order to equalise pension entitlements.
To ensure fairness considering the significant pension accrual by the Respondent in the period after separation.
Transfer of properties: Noida property to Applicant, FMH to Applicant, HA to Respondent.
Part of the asset distribution to reflect the equal split of assets