Mr Myerson applied to the Court of Appeal to reopen a financial order in divorce proceedings because, he claimed, the current economic climate meant that he could no longer afford to pay his former wife the final instalment due under the financial order. Not only that, but, following the collapse in value of his corporate assets, complying with the financial order would mean that his former wife was now going to get over 100% of the current value of joint assets.
Under the financial order, Mrs Myerson was due to receive 43% of the couple’s marital assets in instalments. Her share was largely made up of liquid, risk-free assets and property. Mr Myerson was to retain his corporate assets.
The Court of Appeal found that varying an instalment of a lump sum can only be agreed where circumstances have changed very significantly or it would be unjust to hold the payer to the agreement. The Court would only re-open an agreement if the fundamental basis on which the agreement had been made was invalidated.
The Court found that Mr Myerson’s assets had been valued correctly at the time the financial order had been made and the subsequent decrease in value was not sufficient to have the financial order re-opened. The Judges also noted that Mr Myerson’s assets could have increased in value, but Mrs Myerson would not have been able to re-open the financial order on that basis.
Lawson-West recommend that divorcing couples consider sharing the risk when deciding how the matrimonial assets will be divided. That way, neither party will be left significantly worse off if fluctuations occur which substantially decrease the value of those assets.
If you would like further information on ancillary relief or dividing assets on divorce, please contact James Haworth on 0116 212 1080 now or complete one of the on-line forms.
