Miller/McFarlane
[2006] UKHL 24; [2006] 2 AC 618, the House of Lords identified three principles that should guide the court in trying to achieve fairness, namely:-(a)The sharing of matrimonial property generated by the parties during their marriage;(b)Compensation for relationship generated disadvantage; and(c)Needs balanced against ability to pay. 33.It follows that my first task is to assess the matrimonial property generated by the parties during the marriage. There are assets in this case that are clearly non-matrimonial, namely those inherited by the parties or gifted to them. In my view, there is absolutely no question in this case that I should completely exclude them from consideration and I do so. The really significant issue, however, is whether I should also exclude from the matrimonial property all the assets held by the parties separately on the basis of the Marriage Contract.34.The leading case remains
- JUDGMENT
- The relevant history
- The statements and expert reports
- The assets
- The Open Offers
- Wells
- The Law
- White v White
- K v L
- Miller/McFarlane
- Radmacher
- Kremen v Agrest
- Versteegh v Versteegh
- Z v Z (No 2)
- Brack v Brack
- Brack
- SJ v RA
- Duxbury
- The evidence I heard
- My findings as to the Marriage Contract
- The quantification of the assets
- £ 3,284,021
- The Wife’s needs
- £1,395,541
- Cross-check
- Ms D
- Child periodical payments
- CB v KB
- Conclusion
