Case No. FD20F00034-and-FD19P00380

[2010] UKSC 13 where Lord Collins said under the heading “ The proper approach ”: " 72. It is not the purpose of Part III to allow a spouse (usually, in current conditions, the wife) with some English connections to make an application in England to take advantage of what may well be the more generous approach in England to financial provision, particularly in so-called big-money cases. There is no condition of exceptionality for the purposes of section 16, but it will not usually be a case for an order under Part III where the wife had a right to apply for financial relief under the foreign law, and an award was made in the foreign country. In such cases mere disparity between that award and what would be awarded on an English divorce will certainly be insufficient to trigger the application of Part III. Nor is hardship or injustice (much less serious injustice) a condition of the exercise of the jurisdiction, but if either factor is present, it may make it appropriate, in the light of all the circumstances, for an order to be made, and may affect the nature of the provision ordered. Of course, the court will not lightly characterise foreign law, or the order of a foreign court, as unjust. 73. The amount of financial provision will depend on all the circumstances of the case and there is no rule that it should be the minimum amount required to overcome injustice. The following general principles should be applied. First, primary consideration must be given to the welfare of any children of the marriage. This can cut both ways as the children may be being supported by the foreign spouse. Second, it will never be appropriate to make an order which gives the claimant more than she or he would have been awarded had all proceedings taken place within this jurisdiction. Third, where possible the order should have the result that provision is made for the reasonable needs of each spouse. Subject to these principles, the court has a broad discretion. The reasons why it was appropriate for an order to be made in England are among the circumstances to be taken into account in deciding what order should be made. Where the English connections of the case are very strong there may be no reason why the application should not be treated as if it were made in purely English proceedings." 52. Earlier in the judgment he dealt with how to approach cases where the connection with England was either strong or not so strong, saying:- “ 53. I am, however, satisfied that this is a suitable case for me to exercise my powers. I am particularly influenced by the close connection of the parties to this jurisdiction and the fact that HRH and the children are now completely based here; by the inability of HRH to claim in Dubai; and the fact that she is not making a sharing claim or indeed any substantive claim for herself other than in relation to security and compensation for the “lost” chattels. I am sure it would not have been suitable for her to make a sharing claim even if she had wished to do so and I would not have granted such a claim. I do consider that she would have had a needs claim for herself had she decided to make one, particularly given her commitment to the children. As it is, I am satisfied that the claim she makes should not be constrained by the limits put on Part III claims.