Holly was instructed shortly before a final hearing to represent a Wife in financial proceedings. The main issue involved the family home and how the net proceeds should be split. There were a number of uncertainties which complicated the financial split.
The children were living with different family members, and it was not clear with whom they would reside long-term, and therefore what the parties’ respective housing needs were. The parties had disparate incomes and the wife was on sick leave, making it difficult to know what her future earning and mortgage capacity was. The Husband also sought to ‘add back’ various funds that the Wife had used, she said to support herself whilst she was not working.
The Husband sought over 70% of the assets on the basis that he would care for the children, and assumed that the Wife would rent with the remainder. The Wife sought near to an even split, given the unknowns in the case and her limited earning capacity.
The Court heard evidence and submissions from both parties, and Holly’s expertise and attention to detail enabled her to effectively represent the Wife’s interests despite the uncertainties of the situation. The Court ordered that the husband receive 55% of the assets, leaving the wife with enough to purchase a property in the medium term. Additionally, the court did not order any ‘add back’ of the funds used by the Wife, accepting that they were essentially in lieu of spousal support.