its importance is mainly, of course, in cases where a lump sum has been ordered to be paid by instalments. In our view variations should not be permitted
. An order for a lump sum of £5,000 payable by five yearly instalments of £1,000 is to be distinguished from financial provision of £1,000 per annum for five years. Apart from the different tax consequences, the former should not end on the death or remarriage of the payee whereas the latter would.
- Approved Judgment
- Mr Justice Mostyn:
- its importance is mainly, of course, in cases where a lump sum has been ordered to be paid by instalments. In our view variations should not be permitted
- In our view once an order for a lump sum has been perfected its amount should not be variable whatever may happen later.
- It will be observed that though the amount of lump sums will not be variable (the reasons for this are set out in paragraph 89 of the Report) the provisions relating to the instalments or any security therefor will be variable. A change of circumstances may make it just either to extend or to curtail the time of payment of the instalments or, indeed, to increase or reduce the number of instalments.
- or sums
- Although at first sight the meaning and purpose of section 2(2) of the Act is not entirely clear, it seems to me that it is merely a declaratory subsection, for on any construction section 2(1)(c) at least allows sums to be ordered on a first application.”
- …(c) an order that either party to the marriage shall pay to the other such lump sum or sums as may be so specified.
- this section
- that sum