Control of daily life
: W says that H controlled where she went and what she did. She accepted that he never stopped her doing what she wanted, although he might ‘send her to Coventry’. When pressed, she could not give any example of an activity that he stopped her doing, but said that he frowned on them. I see nothing controlling in H’s request that W mark on the big calendar hanging in the kitchen when she was going to be out, as did H. This did not amount to her requiring his approval, but simply enabled each to know when the other was to be in or out. 36.There was no evidence of H restricting W’s contact with family or friends or seeking to keep tabs on her. The allegation that he sought to put a tracker on her phone was a complete misunderstanding. She had twice lost her phone and H simply passed on a suggestion made by one of his children that she install a “find my phone” app. 37.
- 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
