Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

FAMILY: DIVORCE > SECTION 25 MCA 1973 > Flashcards

SECTION 25 MCA 1973 Flashcards

1
Q

2 cases essential to statutory interpretaion

A

MILLER: MCFARLANE 2006

RADMACHER v GRANATINO 2010

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Principles established in MILLER: MCFARLANE 2006

RADMACHER v GRANATINO 2010

A

1) Needs
2) Equality
3) Compensation
4) Autonomy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

NEEDS

A

Primary consideration - CHARMAN 2007

DIscusses in context of lifestyle enjoyed etc

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

AR v AR 2011

A
  • assessing needs of W after 25y marriage assets worth £25m
  • future needs: £3.2m plus £700k
  • assesment not necessarily mathmatical but reasonable monthly mudget taken into account
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

EQUALITY

A

introduced by WHITE v WHITE 2000

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

WHITE v WHITE 2000

A
  • Major reconsideration of discretion

- L NICHOLLS -> equality is yard stick only departed from for good reason

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

When to departe from equality?

A

1) Needs
2) Extrondinary contribution
3) Parental contribution or inheretence
4) Non- maritial property
5) obvious gross misconduct
6) Difficulties in liquidation of assets

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Departing from WHITE yardstick of equality

NEED

A
  • Needs of C and res P come first J vJ 2009
  • Only wealthy couples can really use equality
    LAMBERT 2002
  • Equally divide surplus assetsafter needs met
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Departing from WHITE yardstick of equality

EXTRONDINARY CONTROBUTION

A

LAMBERT 2002 - exceptional cases only

SORREL 2006 - family fortune due to H’s ‘spark of genius’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Departing from WHITE yardstick of equality

NON MARITIAL PROPERTY

A

LAWRENCE v GALLAGER 2012

- premaritial wealth can result in departure from equality

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are the factors of s25

A 
s25(2)a= financial resources
s25(2)b= needs/oblgations/responsibilities 
s25(2) c = standard of living
s25(2)d = age of parties and length of marriage
s25(2) e = disabilities
s25(2) f = contributions
s25 (2) g = conduct 
s25(3) = welfare of C
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Welfare of C

A 
PRIMARY CONCERN
Is s25(3)  dependent on factors in 25(2)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

2 ways Cs interests relevent in divorce?

A

1) Contary to Cs interests if either parent lives in strained circumstances - EVE 1990
2) Family home sometimes best for C to remain there - BvB 2002: even tho meant no capital to purchase seperate home, Cs interest was primary
3) Deciding if res P should provide or rely on maintance payment - LEADBEATER 1985: not expected for res P of young C to work

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

FINANCIAL RESOURCES
s25(2) a
ISSUES

A

1) Court can’t take into account 3rd party
RE L: even if new partner v rich not relevent but may reduce needs
TL v ML - can make award based on third party but only if the are willing and able to do thing required
2) Wealthy people often hide assets in companies
PETRODEL RESOURCES 2013
3) personal injury claims (MANSFIELD 2011)
4) Present income, includes bonuses ( PvP)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

A v A

A

Cant expect 45 yo wife o find employment even though she had engineering degree
- had spent 20 ys looking after C

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

NEEDS/OBLIGATIONS/RESPONSIBILITIES

s25(2) b

A

Can be lifestyle used to RK v RK

F v F: cant need 3 houses, change to ‘reasonable requirement’

17
Q

AGE OF PARTIES AND LENGTH OF MARRIAGE

s25(2)d

A

1) Shorter marriage less reward ATTAR 1985
2) spouse is entitled to share in assets made during the marriage -> MILLER 2006: £5m as husband had mad a LOT in 3 years married

18
Q

CONTIBUTION TO FAMILY WELFARE

s25(2)f

A

1) Contributing to family welfare important -> WHITE 2000 ‘no bias in favour of money earner’
2) Significant contribution to family business -> r vR 2012: business prob not as successful without Ws input, so awarded significant share in company on divorce

19
Q

CONDUCT

s25(2) g

A

Inequitable for court to disregard -> S v S: gasp not gulp
K v K 1990: assisting in Hs suicide to get money lessened award
K v L 2010: sexually abusing grandchildren gets nothing of £4m estate ‘legacy of misery’

20
Q

Is good conduct consider under s25(2) g

A

YES

A v A 1995: w got a degree to get a better job to support husband who refused to work -> deserved reward

FAMILY: DIVORCE (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions