£7,155
£11,748In addition, I allow £10,000 for works on her home, bearing in mind that H has already provided a similar sum in 2018.83.I delete from her capital needs the following:i)The payment off of her investment property mortgage. I will return to this;ii)The provision of a garden office. If W wishes to have an office in the garden, which she has never had before, then it is a matter for her to marshal her finances to achieve that;iii)An element of the sum that she wishes to spend on her house. There is significant betterment and I have no evidence that the sums that she would like to spend are urgent; andiv)A capital fund for replacement cars. The concept of requiring £80,000 for what might be 3 replacement cars over the rest of W’s driving life when she has never spent more than very modest sums on used cars is excessive. Depreciation can be built into her budget.84.Income need: W claims an income need of £51,600pa. It is obvious that this is far more than she has ever had available or spent at any time that I have been told of. Her budget is to that extent artificial. I have had regard to her Form E budget and have removed from it the repayments to Haford Energy, Barclaycard, her father and a builder who has since been paid which together total some £900pm. I also park the monthly sums claimed for long-term counselling and family therapy which together total £370pm. Taking those two totals off her Form E budget reduces it to some £3,000pm. This figure includes the costs of her car HP. 85.In looking at a budget, it is important to look at the context. On W’s own evidence she has never at any time had a net income of near £3,000pm. I have no doubt that W can and will live at a lesser rate than this and still have capacity to meet the costs of any therapy that she needs together with any other unbudgeted expenditure without any significant diminution in the quality of her life.86.The income in this case is now modest, with H having retired. It seems to me taking everything into account that W has an additional income need of some £10,000pa net until retirement. At that stage, she will lose her earned income but will receive instead her state pension and also a pension share. 87.When considering the pension share calculations that I have been given, I take W’s retirement age as being 67, when she will reach state retirement age. Not only does that approximate to the date that H retired as a barrister, but it seems to me to be fair to expect W to work until that age. She loves her work and wants to continue with it.88.At age 67 it is agreed that to provide each party with the same pension income of that part of H’s pension which has been earned during their time together there would need to be a 12.1% share of the benefits accrued by H within the AJ Bell SIPP. The value of the credit is
- Approved Judgment
- Sir Jonathan Cohen:
- The parties
- The proceedings
- The law
- Edgar v Edgar
- Radmacher v Granatino
- Physical violence
- Control of daily life
- Finances
- Drinking
- Dr Jones
- Drawing the threads together
- Matrimonial acquest
- Other evidence
- The parties’ open offers
- Assets
- Radmacher
- MacLeod v MacLeod
- W’s needs
- £7,155
- £165,284
- Costs
- POSTSCRIPT
