• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

The impact of health issues when dealing with a financial claim on divorce

In the recent case of ND v GD [2021] EWFC 53, Peel J had to consider and carefully balance sensitive and conflicting factors – namely, the wife’s particular and special health needs and how to deal with the husband’s significant non-matrimonial assets (his inheritance)– to achieve a fair financial outcome.

The wife, sadly, was diagnosed with Young Onset Alzheimer’s (“YOA”) disease shortly after the parties’ separation in 2018 and she was represented by her litigation friend in the proceedings. Several medical experts were involved in the case and, having a neurodegenerative condition, it was accepted that the wife will inevitably require much greater support in the future.

In respect of the parties’ finances, the vast majority of the assets were non-matrimonial with the husband having solely inherited his mother’s estate worth c. £3.2million, 5 years prior to the parties’ separation. At the date of the final hearing, the net assets were around £2.6 million (after deduction of a significant IHT liability on the husband’s property portfolio). The parties’ joint assets totalled some £750,000 (including pensions), of which just over £380,000 was the net equity in the former matrimonial home.

As above, in his judgment, Peel J had to carefully weigh up the following considerations:

(i)         The length of the marriage, being some 23 years;

(ii)        The bulk of the assets being non-matrimonial; and

(iii)       The wife’s diagnosis of YOA which will have a significant effect on her life expectancy and       medical needs during her remaining years. Peel J found her life expectancy to be between 5 to 10 years based on the evidence of an expert (a consultant old age psychiatrist). 

Some of the main issues in this case concerned what housing and income fund would be appropriate for the wife in light of her health requirements.

Evidence was given by a later life IFA on bespoke capitalisation funds factoring in the wife’s anticipated income and care costs over a range of different possible life expectancies, however, in his judgment, Peel J found these to be of limited use and reminded practitioners that, whilst Duxbury calculations (a formula used by courts to calculate a capital sum in lieu of periodical payments) are a tool and not a rule, “there would have to be a very good reason to go down a different route”. 

In respect of the wife’s housing needs, Peel J heard evidence about the wife’s particular needs and that location was a priority as was the importance of her being close to ‘facilities, friends, activities and structure’.

Peel J ordered the wife a total lump sum of £950,000 on a clean break basis. This involved utilising a significant portion of the husband’s non-matrimonial assets to meet her housing need (assessed at £650,000) and her capitalised income/care costs fund (assessed at £300,000). Peel J preferred a clean break to avoid the emotional and financial cost of an ongoing financial relationship (and likely numerous future variation applications) if periodical payments (maintenance) were ordered and noted that having the flexibility of a fund would be beneficial to the wife.

The wife ultimately received 37% of the net assets, but this was £575,000 more than her half share of the matrimonial assets, which reflected her significant and complex needs and the length of the marriage. This case highlights the sensitivities and also the special considerations that need to be factored in when a party has significant health needs.

Peel J also took the opportunity to remind practitioners of the need to comply with the practice guidance and to provide the court with a single agreed schedule of assets and chronology, on which any un-agreed items are clearly denoted.

A clean break is highly desirable. There is some tension between the parties, and I do not consider that W is strong enough to cope with the ongoing stress of financial and legal links. A periodical payments order could be subject to multiple applications to court because there are so many variables in care requirements; the expense and emotional toll would be heavy.

Our thinking

  • BBC Radio 5 Live and The Telegraph interview Sarah Jane Boon on Labour’s plans for cohabitation reform

    Sarah Jane Boon

    In the Press

  • When is 20% not 20%? The real impact of the proposed changes to business property relief on trading companies

    Sarah Wray

    Quick Reads

  • Cohabitation law reform

    Hannah Owen

    Quick Reads

  • "I have finished the court case and I have decided that now is not the right time for you to see your Mum" - Judges writing letters to children could become the norm

    Matt Foster

    Quick Reads

  • Pet Ownership and Family Breakdown: Transatlantic Treatment of Pets on Divorce

    Miranda Fisher

    Quick Reads

  • Miranda Fisher and Matt Foster write for eprivateclient on the consequences of cohabitation

    Miranda Fisher

    In the Press

  • Sarah Jane Boon and Julia Cox write for Tax Adviser on safeguarding family wealth and the role of pre- and post-nuptial agreements

    Sarah Jane Boon

    In the Press

  • Living Together in the 2020s: Why more Gen Z’s are Saying 'Yes' to Cohabitation Agreements

    Cara Fung

    Quick Reads

  • Vanessa Duff writes for Expat Living on mental health, parenting styles, and seeking help

    Vanessa Duff

    In the Press

  • LADbible quotes Sarah Jane Boon on the legal binding nature of marriages from Netflix’s 'Love is Blind'

    Sarah Jane Boon

    In the Press

  • Children’s Mental Health: a consideration for family law practitioners every week

    Rebecca Arnold

    Quick Reads

  • Protecting Premarital Wealth and the Family Home for Molly-Mae

    Miranda Fisher

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys finds that 3 in 4 Gen Z adults plan on tying the knot as young people embrace traditional life milestones

    Sarah Jane Boon

    News

  • What is the cost of cohabitation? For Dale Vince, it was over £11m.

    Matt Foster

    Quick Reads

  • Has the UAE recognised the principle of Without Prejudice Privilege?

    Maher Al Nashar

    Quick Reads

  • Jenny from (her agreed share of) the Block: Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck’s mediation settlement

    Sarah Anticoni

    Quick Reads

  • They think it’s all over … it is now! Are the changes to non-dom status an own goal against our footballers?

    Joshua Green

    Quick Reads

  • The Importance of Pre and Post Nuptial Agreements: Research reveals only one in ten couples have an agreement

    Miranda Fisher

    Quick Reads

  • The Law Society Gazette and eprivateclient quote Sarah Jane Boon on 'Divorce Day'

    Sarah Jane Boon

    In the Press

  • BBC Radio Surrey interviews Shona Alexander on ‘Divorce Day’

    Shona Alexander

    In the Press

Back to top