The recently reported case of Hart v Hart concerned Karen Hart, 60, and John Hart, 77. The couple had been married for more than 20 years and Mrs Hart was awarded \u00a33.5million from the \u00a310million family pot. <\/p>\n
Mr Hart tried to appeal this decision in the Court of Appeal on the basis that the initial award to Mrs Hart was unfair and ignored the fact she was living with another man for what Mr Hart thought could be 10 years. Solicitors for Mrs Hart however argued that, after more than 20 years of marriage, she was \u2018anxious to remain financially independent\u2019 and should not have to rely on her new partner to maintain her lifestyle and said that she has no current intention to marry. <\/p>\n
The Husband\u2019s application failed and, his application for permission to appeal was refused. Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division ruled that \u2018the presence of [Mrs Hart\u2019s] new partner in her life did not diminish her needs\u2019. <\/p>\n
This case reaffirms the principle that all financial needs must be met by parties to a marriage and this responsibility cannot be avoided. Sir James Munby did however point out in his judgment that upon these cases are fact-specific and all the evidence should be considered before a judge comes to a conclusion as to whether the prospects of remarriage or the future prospects of a relationship should or should not be taken into account in making a financial settlement. <\/p>\n
If you are concerned about the impact of a new relationship on a financial settlement and other issues relating to divorce, please contact a member of our team for more advice. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The recently reported case of Hart v Hart concerned Karen Hart, 60, and John Hart, 77. The couple had been married for more than 20 years and Mrs Hart was awarded \u00a33.5million from the \u00a310million family pot. Mr Hart tried to appeal this decision in the Court of Appeal on the basis that the initial… Read More »The impact of a new relationship on financial settlements \u2013 Wife receives \u00a33.5m despite Husband arguing payment should be reduced due to Wife living with new partner<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[170,10,175,39],"tags":[3,12,13,77,49,169,42,11,9,19],"class_list":["post-454","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-divorce-law","category-family-law","category-lund-bennett","category-parenting","tag-divorce-law","tag-divorce-laws","tag-divorce-lawyer","tag-divorce-settlement","tag-divorce-solicitors","tag-family-law","tag-family-law-lawyers-altrincham","tag-family-solicitor","tag-lund-bennett","tag-lund-bennett-law"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t