KG v NB
[2023] EWFC 160 (B)
Zhaolong Li (known as Nathan Li) v Oliver Benjamin Simons
30 June 2023
[2023] EWHC 1626 (Fam)
High Court
A dad kept trying to lower his child support payments, claiming he earned less money. A judge said he'd lied and made him pay less, but also told him to get a real job and rent out his spare apartment to help pay. The judge wasn't happy with the dad's behaviour.
Key Facts
- •Zhaolong Li (Nathan Li) appealed Recorder Chandler KC's order dismissing his application to vary periodical payments.
- •The original order was made in July 2020, following an agreement, setting child maintenance at £2900 per month, reducing over time.
- •Li subsequently applied to vary the order multiple times, citing reduced income due to the pandemic and part-time work.
- •HHJ Gibbons dismissed Li's first variation application, finding he had misled the court about his financial circumstances.
- •Li's second variation application, following the birth of his second child, was dismissed by Recorder Chandler KC, who found it to be an abuse of process.
- •Li appealed, arguing his income was significantly lower than previously found.
- •The appeal concerned Li's income, the admissibility of evidence from his employer's HR director, and the validity of a nominal spousal payment order.
Legal Principles
Applications to vary periodical payments under s.31 Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 require a material change in circumstances; the court exercises a broad discretion and may conduct a proportionate review, not necessarily a de novo consideration.
Morris v Morris [2016] EWCA Civ 812; Flavell v Flavell [1997] 1 FLR 353; Garner v Garner [1992] 1 FLR 573
There must be finality in litigation; a party cannot relitigate issues already decided without demonstrating error in the original decision; the final hearing is not a dress rehearsal.
Fage v Chobani UK Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 3
A Segal order (nominal spousal maintenance to facilitate child maintenance variation) must contain a substantial ingredient of spousal support.
Dorney-Kingdom [2000] 2 FLR 855
Permission to appeal requires a real prospect of success or some other compelling reason.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, Rule 30.3; Re: R (A Child) [2019] EWCA Civ 895
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The court found that Recorder Chandler KC should have admitted the evidence of Ms Zhou and that Li's income was closer to £4300 per month than the previously determined £9866 per month. The court also considered Li's litigation conduct.
Child maintenance reduced to £1550 per month (from £2185) from September 2022.
Based on a recalculated income of £7500 per month (estimated by the judge) and application of the percentage used in the original order. The judge considered Li's litigation misconduct in reaching this amount.
Nominal spousal payment order upheld.
The court found that the order served a purpose beyond facilitating child maintenance variation and contained a substantial element of spousal support.
Li ordered to work full-time and rent out his London property.
Based on findings of fact by Recorder Chandler KC that Li's part-time work and failure to rent out the property were not credible.