TK v AC
[2023] EWHC 2958 (Fam)
AB v BA
5 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 1179 (Fam)
High Court
A husband appealed a court order about how much his ex-wife should pay him back for legal costs. The judge decided the ex-wife should pay more than originally ordered because she had more money available than she'd let on. He made a plan for her to pay it back in installments, starting small and gradually increasing the amount.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against two costs orders made by HHJ Oliver on 9 June and 30 June 2023.
- •Appeal concerns enforcement of the orders, specifically the repayment rate and whether enforcement should be deferred.
- •Appellant is the husband, respondent is the former wife. Two children are involved.
- •Wife has limited capital; cost orders can only be satisfied through deductions from maintenance payments (£101,341pa).
- •Outstanding costs orders against the wife total approximately £100,000, including interest.
- •HHJ Oliver ordered repayment of £62,019.97 at £50pcm and deferred enforcement of other liabilities.
- •Wife conceded to £500pcm repayment and £1000 towards appeal costs.
- •Husband sought £1000pcm repayment.
Legal Principles
Appellate courts should be slow to interfere with findings of fact by trial judges.
Fage UK Ltd & Anor v Chobani UK Ltd & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ
For an instalment order, a realistic repayment schedule backed by evidence of receipt of principal and interest within a reasonable time is needed; creditor's interests are paramount.
Loson v Stack [2018] EWCA Civ 803
Outcomes
Increased repayment rate to £700pcm initially, increasing to £1000pcm after 5 years.
Wife's concession to higher payments, consideration of her budget, and the need to balance the children's interests with the wife's debt.
Enforcement of further costs orders to proceed consecutively at the same rate once the initial liability is cleared.
Avoiding further applications and providing a final determination of liability.