Divorce Case Criticised For “Unprincipled” Financial Remedy Proceedings
Divorce case criticised for “unprincipled” financial remedy proceedings in which £200,000 spent on legal fees.
A recent divorce case which led to “feral, unprincipled and unnecessarily expensive financial remedy proceedings” has led to heavy scrutiny and criticism by the Family Court.
In Uddin v Uddin & Ors [2022] EWFC 75, HHJ Stephen Wildblood QC described the dispute between the couple – both of whom were found to have lied in parts of their evidence – as “a disgraceful example of how financial remedy proceedings should not be conducted”.
He said that his case “should have been simple”, but the wife made ‘hopeless’ claims that her ex-husband has beneficial interests in two other properties and a controlling influence in a restaurant. The dispute ultimately came down to “a matrimonial pot of about £730,000”, comprising the value of the two properties in dispute. However the parties, including the various other respondents who were sued by the wife, had racked up more than £200,000 in legal costs.
The judge’s view was that “a significant proportion of [the costs] have been driven by the wife’s dogmatic pursuit of the speculative and unprincipled trust claims and by the husband’s dishonest portrayal of his position within the [restaurant] business”.
HHJ Wildblood added:
“As I have made plain throughout this judgment, I consider that these proceedings are a disgraceful example of how financial remedy proceedings should not be conducted. The wife may wish to take advice about why her case was presented in this way and why so much expense has been incurred.
I intend that any applications for permission to appeal should be refused. Given the level of conflict in this case I would wish to emphasise that, as far as I am concerned, this is a final and complete judgment and I do not expect to receive further argument about matters that I have decided within it.”
Hardly a week goes by without a reported judgment despairing about the level of costs in Family Court proceedings. In this case the legal costs amounted to 27% of the net assets available.
Author Name: Editor
Published content by The Divorce Surgery Editorial Team.
Related Posts
