White v White
[2000] 2 FLR 981.iii)There is no place for discrimination between husband and wife and their respective roles; White v White at 989C.iv)In an evaluation of fairness, the court is required to have regard to the s25 criteria, first consideration being given to any child of the family.v)S25A is a powerful encouragement towards a clean break, as explained by Baroness Hale at [133] of
- MR JUSTICE PEEL
- £2,230,000 mortgage liability
- Computation
- £117,036
- Sharing principle
- The Law
- Charman v Charman
- White v White
- Miller; McFarlane
- [2020]
- [2017] 2
- [2011] 2 FLR 980
- [2018] 1
- Charman (supra)
- Miller/McFarlane
- BD v FD [2017] 1 FLR 1420.
- [2017]
- The Law: Pre-Marital and Post-Marital Agreements
- Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42
- The Law: inter vivos subvention
- M v M [2020] EWFC 41
- [1995] 2 FLR 668
- [2014] EWHC 502
- [2017] EWCA Civ 1545
- [2005] EWHC 2860
- Alireza v Radwan [2018] 1 FLR 1333
- The Pre-Marital Agreement
- undue
- undue
- BN v MA [2014] EWHC 2450
- Inter vivos subventions by H’s father
- Alireza
- fact
- timing
- The parties’ proposals
- Needs and outcome
- £4m.
- £3,319,000
- £7,319,000
- £7.45m
- Conclusion
- Costs