Olivia Piercy and Anita Mehta consider abuse in divorce settlements in Today’s Family Lawyer

  • February 08, 2024
  • By Jasmin Bice

Olivia and Anita’s article was published in Today’s Family Lawyer, 8 February 2024, and can be found here.

Considering abuse in divorce settlements

In respect of financial remedies cases, Section 25(2)(g) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 specifies that a parties’ conduct, that is not inequitable to disregard, is one of the relevant considerations for the courts when exercising their distributive powers.

The modern approach to conduct was set out by Mostyn J in OG v AG[1], which set out the four distinct scenarios in which conduct rears its head in financial remedy cases[2]:

  • gross and obvious misconduct meted out by one party against the other;
  • add-back;
  • litigation misconduct;
  • drawing adverse inferences;

Those four categories were endorsed in Tsvetkov v Khayrova, where Mr Justice Peel, also clarified:

  1. that to meet the high hurdle of conduct, that is not inequitable to disregard, the conduct must have a financial impact, but that impact does have to be financially measurable; and
  2. the procedure when a party is pleading conduct. This includes his view that the Judge can make a case management decision at the FDA that a party is not allowed to pursue a conduct case if the Judge considers that the allegations would not cross the threshold of being inequitable to disregard, or if the allegations once found would not have a material impact on the outcome;
    The Family Court has come a long way in its approach to domestic abuse when considering the appropriate arrangements for children. The decision in Re H-N[3] marked a key development in the understanding of coercive and controlling behaviour in private children cases; clarifying what amounts to domestic abuse, the impact of coercive and controlling behaviour and how the Court should approach the history between the parties. There seems to be a disconnect between that understanding, and the FRC authorities where the examples of personal conduct that cross the threshold are at the extreme end of the spectrum, but are also narrow in terms of the types of abuse that are capable of being recognised, for example financial (draining funds from the family resources[4]), or physical (attempted murder[5]).

The Fair Shares Report[6] revealed that domestic abuse may deter a victim from pursuing and receiving child maintenance, spousal maintenance, or even just the capital division. These are all issues that the FRC, and the Law Commission in their current work, will have to grapple with.

Resolution has recently opened a survey to understand what professionals working in Family Justice think about these issues (the survey seeks the views of not just lawyers but also legal executives, financial planners, mediators, etc). The link to the survey is here and it should take no more than 5 minutes to complete: Please share your views with us.

Written by Anita Mehta (a barrister at 4PB) and Olivia Piercy (a solicitor at Hunters Law LLP)

[1] OG v AG [2020] EWFC 52 [72] [2] Supra note 2, [34]-[40] [3] Re H-N and Others (Children) (Domestic Abuse: Finding of Fact Hearings) [2021] EWCA Civ 448
[4] DP v EP (Conduct: Economic Abuse: Needs) [2023] EWFC 6
[5] H v H (Financial Relief: attempted murder as conduct) [2005] EWHC 2911 (Fam)
[6] The Fair Shares Report; Sorting out money and property on divorce

Related News

Feb 14, 2024
Henry Hood and Anna Roiser examine the new transparency pilot in the family court
Feb 09, 2024
Henry Hood and Anna Roiser discuss the transparency reporting pilot for financial remedy proceedings in eprivateclient
Feb 08, 2024
Olivia Piercy and Henry Hood explore the intersection between LSPOs and economic abuse in Financial Remedies Journal
Jan 31, 2024
Richard Kershaw comments on the Supreme Court judgment in Potanina v Potanin
Jan 16, 2024
Henry Hood recognised in eprivateclient’s ’50 Most Influential’ 2024
Dec 19, 2023
Hunters’ Family team celebrates pro-bono successes and expands commitment
Dec 01, 2023
Hunters shortlisted at the British Family Law Awards 2024
Nov 24, 2023
Can you use the same solicitor for a divorce in England?
Oct 27, 2023
Olivia Piercy calls to review the law on ‘conduct’ in financial remedy cases in the Financial Remedies Journal
Oct 16, 2023
Hunters recognised as one of the 2023 eprivateclient Top Family Law Firms


© Hunters Law LLP 2024 | Privacy NoticeLegal & Regulatory | Cookies Policy | Complaints Procedure

Hunters Law LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (number 657218)