Hart v Hart
[2017] EWCA Civ 1306; [2018] 2 WLR 509, in which Moylan LJ said at Paragraph [96]:-“If the court has not been able to make a specific factual demarcation but has come to the conclusion that the parties’ wealth includes an element of non-matrimonial property, the court will also have to fit this determination into the section 25 discretionary exercise. The court will have to decide, adopting Wilson LJ’s formulation of the broad approach in
- MR JUSTICE MOOR:-
- The relevant history
- The breakdown of the marriage
- The respective Forms E
- The evidence before me
- The position of the PE company
- Section 25 statements
- The valuation of DEF Inc and the other business
- Statement of Issues
- Open proposals
- The Tax enquiry
- The respective Position Statements
- Duxbury
- The Assets Schedule
- £ 3,551,912
- The law I have to apply
- White v White
- K v L
- Miller/McFarlane
- Hart v Hart
- Miller
- Jones v Jones
- Martin
- Hart
- my emphasis)
- Juffali v Juffali
- The evidence I heard
- My assessment of the assets
- The appropriate deduction for tax liabilities in relation to the enquiry by the tax authority of Country X
- Two relatively small loans made by JR’s estate and a trust belonging to KR to the IR Holding Trust
- The resulting overall figure
- The Pre-Nuptial Agreement
- Radmacher v Granatino
- The DEF Inc Side Deed
- My conclusions as to non-matrimonial property
- XW v XH
- Wells v Wells
- The structure of the award
- £ 120,479
- Calderbank