JL v NN
[2024] EWHC 1489 (Fam)
Michael James Augousti v Amrit Kaur Matharu
10 August 2023
[2023] EWHC 1900 (Fam)
High Court
A husband appealed a divorce financial settlement. The judge said he had no chance of winning and refused his appeal. Some details of the case were kept secret to protect his business.
Key Facts
- •The husband appealed a financial remedy judgment, raising 21 grounds of appeal.
- •The wife's main asset was a 3% shareholding in a hotel company, valued at £20.9m pro rata but significantly discounted by the judge due to lack of liquidity and family control.
- •The husband had accumulated substantial post-separation debts, rendering him insolvent.
- •The husband repeatedly attempted to introduce new evidence after the hearing, delaying judgment.
- •The judge awarded the husband £75,000 outright, housing, and limited maintenance, citing the husband's debts and the wife's limited resources.
- •The husband's appeal challenged the judge's assessment of his needs, the wife's resources, and various procedural decisions.
Legal Principles
Test for introducing further evidence after judgment reserved
FPR 30.12(2)(b) and case law
Scope of court's discretion when exercising the needs principle
Case law on financial remedies
Test for adducing fresh evidence on appeal
FPR 30.12(2)(b), Ladd v Marshall
Standard of review for appellate decisions
Re B (a Child), R (On the Application Of) Wales & West Utilities Ltd v Competition And Markets Authority
Test for permission to appeal
FPR 30.3(7)(a), Re R (A Child), American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd
Test for 'totally without merit' appeal
FPR 30.3(5A)
Overriding objective in family proceedings
FPR 1.1(2)
Reporting restrictions and open justice
s. 12 Administration of Justice Act 1960, s. 11 Contempt of Court Act 1981, Scott v Scott, CPR 39.2(3)(c), Lykiadouplou, Practice Guidance on Interim Non-Disclosure Orders
Outcomes
Permission to appeal refused
No ground of appeal had a real prospect of success; some were deemed 'totally without merit'.
Application to adduce fresh evidence refused
The new evidence did not meet the Ladd v Marshall test.
Reporting restriction order imposed
To protect confidential commercial information.
Similar Cases
Philip John Mainwaring v Susan Claire Bailey
[2024] EWHC 2296 (Fam)
Kay Jacqueline Butler v Earl Anthony Butler
[2023] EWHC 2453 (Fam)
Sofia Bogolyubova v Gennadiy Bogolyubov & Anor
[2023] EWCA Civ 547
The Incorporated Trustees of Great Calling Ministries Worldwide v Auguster Omonigho Irabor & Anor
[2024] EWHC 803 (Fam)