chester

Chester 01244 405 555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

shrewsbury

Shrewsbury 01743 443043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ
DX: 148563 Shrewsbury 14

Slide e

Airport City, Manchester 0161 537 3324

Offices 204 and 205
Manchester Business Park
3000 Aviator Way
Manchester M22 5TG

Draining the tank – is equal sharing of assets enough?

jackson simmer VqgB SrE unsplash e

12th June, 2020

When divorcing, it is settled law that there should be no discrimination between ‘breadwinner’ and ‘homemaker’ in financial arrangements.

However, the debate about sharing post-divorce earnings rages on.

A recent court decision focusses on the extent to which the wife should be required to deplete her capital award so as to meet her income needs for the rest of her life, whereas the husband’s position was such that he would have surplus income and increase his assets during the same period.

Whilst equal sharing of capital is usually inevitable in cases where assets exceed current needs (absent a Pre Nuptial Agreement or non-matrimonial property) what will courts do where a non-working party, without any earning capacity, has an obvious gap between their lifetime income needs and the income they can generate from investing their capital?

The answer in recent cases looks fairly bleak for someone in that position and arguably this is at odds with the non-discrimination principle that lies at the heart of modern family law.

Historically, courts have remedied this either by the imposition of a spousal maintenance order or an additional capital award (over and above equal sharing of assets). In smaller value cases, this may still be the way that Judges find the fair solution. In CB v KB, however, the Judge expected that the wife may have to spend over 70% of her capital award to meet her and her 6 children’s income needs for the future. His comment “that is what money is for” might be perceived as harsh when contrasted with the husband’s earnings of £640,000 per annum which plainly exceeded his own needs. Whilst the wife’s capital may get close to exhaustion by the time that she dies, the husband would maintain and improve his, simply because of his established earning capacity all of which was built up within the marital partnership.

Whilst it may be fair for parties to divide capital equally where each has an earning capacity, there is obvious relationship-generated disadvantage where the party who has looked after the home and children has impaired or eliminated their own ability to be self-sufficient for the future.

If you need any help with your divorce, please contact our experienced Family team.

Richard Barge

Family

Partner and Head of Team
Email: [email protected]
Tel: 01244 405 443

You might also be interested in...

Chester chosen to host prestigious international conference

9th May, 2022

Chester-based law firm Aaron & Partners will host delegates from all over the world in its home city... Read More »

Handholdingkeystohouse CovidandRentArrears–WhatdoesitmeanforCommercialLandlordsandTenants

Commercial Landlords v Commercial Tenants

4th May, 2022

In light of the ongoing challenges for commercial landlords where their tenants are failing to pay, this article... Read More »

two people removing wedding rings

End of the ‘blame game’ in sight

8th April, 2022

There are significant changes that have been made to divorce law and procedure in England and Wales with... Read More »

Contact Us