The husband’s departure from the SS Company in 2020
8.Unfortunately, the husband did not receive the expected bonuses in the period which followed the judgment and in May 2020 he was ‘asked to leave’ the SS Company altogether. He has been unemployed since that time. In due course he ceased meeting his periodical payments obligations under the order. He says he has since sought other employment; but has not been successful. It has not been suggested before me that this was other than a genuine unemployment situation. This position has been accepted by the CMS, who have assessed him as a nil earner for their purposes. 9.The wife, however, was reluctant to accept a reduction in the husband’s periodical payment obligations to her. Plainly the reductions left her in a difficult financial situation, though (as it happens) a really bad outcome for her has been avoided because her new partner has broadly supported her living costs and somebody (she declined to identify the person when I asked the question) has helped with school fees so that the unpleasant consequence of the children having to be withdrawn from YY School has not happened, until now at least, and A has been successful in achieving a place at XX University.
- Ms Deborah Bangay KC
- The marriage
- The initial financial remedies proceedings up to January 2019
- The husband’s departure from the SS Company in 2020
- The 2020 Cross-Applications
- The 2021 payment
- The 2022 application
- The arrival on the scene of Mr Burrows
- October 2022
- November 2022
- February 2023
- January 2023
- Determination of the attempts by the wife to set aside the March 2021 Order
- Central Family Court
- March 2023
