Will court fee increase in family courts negatively impact access to justice?

Posted on 7th February 20247th February 2024 by McAlister Family Law

Will court fee increase in family courts negatively impact access to justice?

When a relationship ends, those that are married or in a civil partnership have no option but to issue a divorce application if they want to legally formalise their separation. Along with the divorce application, separating couples may also need to pay for a financial order application and a parental order application. Here, Fiona Wood looks at the recent announcement that there will be an increase to all court fees in 2024, and raises the concern that low income households may find themselves unable to make necessary family applications.

If a couple do decide to divorce, as well as issuing a divorce applicaition, they also need to obtain a financial settlement which needs to be approved by a judge if it is to be binding and enforceable. Even if the separation is amicable, a court fee is payable when a divorce application is made and a court fee is payable when a financial agreement is submitted to court for a judge’s approval.

A court fee is also payable by separated parents if they are unable to agree arrangements for their children and need to make an application to court (known as a Parental Order application) to ask a judge to assist them with this issue.

If there are ongoing proceedings regarding finances or children, there can be additional smaller court fees that have to be paid within the court process.

You may be exempt from these fees if you have limited or no income and little or no savings. However, many of those making family court applications have to pay these fees.

The court fees were last increased in September 2021. It has recently been announced that there will be an increase of 10% in all court fees in 2024, including those in family cases. The date for the fee increase has not yet been announced. The main court fees in family proceedings are as follows:

Divorce application – current fee £593 – new fee £652
Financial Order application (if finances not agreed) – current fee £275 – new fee £303
Financial Order application (if agreed) – current fee £53 – new fee £58
Parental order application – current fee £232 – new fee £255

The rationale for the increase is that the court fees are needed to help fund the court system. We are told that in 2022/2023 cost £2.3 billion to fund the court system and £727 million of this was funded from court fees. As the cost of running the court system increases the fees are increased to assist with this cost.

Whilst it is understandable that money needs to be raised to fund that court system, there is a concern that increasing the court fees will prevent many on low incomes from making necessary family court applications.

Legal fees for those who have separated and who need to make an application asking court regarding finances or arrangements for their children, are a struggle for many who have limited income or savings. Legal Aid is only available in very limited circumstances to deal with the legal issues that can arise when a relationship ends. To qualify for Legal Aid not only must you have very limited income and capital, but there must also have been recent domestic violence.

For those of limited means who do not qualify for Legal Aid, many have no option but to represent themselves within the court process. The number of case where both spouses/cohabitees represent themselves within family court proceedings has increased by 25% between 2013 and 2022, which shows how many are struggling with funding the court process. Increasing the court fees will only make this more difficult for them and could leave some unable to afford access to the family court.

If you or someone you know is affected by the issues raised in this blog post, we can provide you with expert legal advice. For more information, please get in touch with our specialist team at hello@mcalisterfamilylaw.co.uk

New fund to help domestic abuse victims escape abuse and help rebuild their lives.

Posted on 22nd January 202422nd January 2024 by McAlister Family Law

New fund to help domestic abuse victims escape abuse and help rebuild their lives.

The Home Office announced that it is introducing a £2 million pound fund to provide support by way off a one-off payment to victims of domestic abuse to help them leave their abusers. Here, Melissa Jones, Senior Associate, looks at what this means for domestic abuse victims and what the funds covers.

What is the fund and how do I make a claim?

From 31^st January 2024, if you are a victim of domestic abuse and you do not have the funds to leave your abuser (if you live together) then you can apply for a one-off payment of £500 for essential items and support with new accommodation.

In addition to the above, victims of domestic abuse can also apply for a further one-off payment of up to £2500 to “help secure a sustainable independent future, such as putting down a deposit for rental accommodation.”

The fund is set to last until March 2025 initially. Women’s Aid has been reappointed to help deliver this service and as of last year the fund helped over 600 victims to safety.

It has been reported that victims of domestic abuse find it hard to leave their abuser due to the costs of living and accommodation costs.

What is Domestic Abuse?

Domestic abuse is when someone close to you, often a partner or spouse causes you physical, sexual, financial or emotional hardship. It is a misconception that in order for you to be categorized as being in an abusive relationship, there must be physical violence. In many cases there is no physical violence; instead, there is psychological and emotional abuse.

Domestic violence can take many forms. Other than physical violence and threats of violence, you may feel intimidated by things that are said to you, or the manner in which you are treated. You may feel controlled and prevented from spending time with friends and family. Abuse can be verbal; you may feel belittled by your partner at home or in front of others.

Senior Associate, Melissa Jones comments “this is a very good initiative and practical step for victims of domestic abuse who are suffering immensely and do not need the added stress of financial constraints when leaving their abuser. With domestic abuse being linked to depression and homelessness, anything that can help to reduce both of these issues is very much needed. Hopefully this will provide immediate and swift assistance to those that need it”.

If you believe you are, or someone you know is suffering from domestic abuse, then there are ways to help you, and them. At McAlister Family Law we can help victims of domestic abuse by advising them on the most appropriate course of action in their particular situation.

Anyone who requires help or support can contact the National Domestic Abuse Helpline which is open 24/7 365 days per year on 0808 2000 247 or via their website https://www.nationaldahelpline.org.uk

Is a divorce on the cards for Kyle Walker and Annie Kilner?

Posted on 18th January 2024 by McAlister Family Law

Is a divorce on the cards for Kyle Walker and Annie Kilner?

After an Instagram story posted by Annie Kilner, it seems that Manchester City star Kyle Walker’s marriage to his childhood sweetheart is at an end. Here, Heather Lucy looks at what will happen if the couple do divorce, how the assets may be divided and how their children’s welfare will be taken into consideration.

On an Instagram story, Annie Kilner has said she is ‘taking some time away’ from her marriage to the football star and online communities are convinced that this means a divorce is on the cards. This seems all the more likely given that Walker has left the family home. Online publications are now speculating whether Kilner is going to have the ‘final revenge’ by seeking a financial settlement on divorce. Whilst this framing is not helpful in trying to have an amicable divorce (which is sensible especially when there are children involved), it does throw up some questions about what will happen to the couple’s finances if a divorce really is on the cards.

Walker and Kilner were married in 2021. On the face of it, it therefore sounds like their marriage was short-lived. This is relevant because the courts take into account the length of a marriage when dividing up matrimonial assets on divorce. They do not, however, limit this to the time since ‘I do’. The relevant timeframe is the length of time since the couple began to live together (if they did so without a break) to when they separated. Walker and Kilner reportedly dated for 12-13 years before they married, though when they first moved in together is not public knowledge. This could, therefore, be an important distinction for the couple as it seems likely to take them from a short marriage to a long one which means that the court would be more likely to use an equal division of the matrimonial assets as a starting point. One fly in the ointment, however, might be the couple’s earlier split in 2019. Kilner will need to take some careful legal advice about this.

During the 2019 split, Walker met Lauryn Goodman who is a model and influencer. Together, they had a child, Kairo, and there are speculations that Goodman’s daughter (born in 2023) was also fathered by Walker. Walker and Kilner share three children together. When looking at the division of finances on divorce, the welfare of children of the family will be the court’s priority. Whilst Goodman’s child(ren) may not be considered ‘children of the family’ (which depends on whether they have been treated as such), Walker’s obligations to them are likely to feature heavily in any negotiations that take place.

The length of the marriage and the existence of children are just two of the factors that the court takes into account when considering the financial division between parties on divorce. Please see Fiona Wood’s article on section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 to explore this in further detail.

Historically, Kilner would have been able to issue an application for divorce on the basis of Walker’s infidelity. This, however, changed in April 2022 when the no-fault divorce regime came into force. This means that the couple’s focus will remain on dividing their assets rather than trying to assign blame to each other for the breakdown of the marriage… in the courts at least. Hopefully, if the marriage has broken down irretrievably, both Walker and Kilner will take good legal advice and aim to reach a resolution in a way that will allow a positive co-parenting relationship for their children.

I’m getting a divorce – Will I get support from my employer?

Posted on 14th September 2023 by McAlister Family Law

I’m getting a divorce – Will I get support from my employer?

Going through a divorce is undoubtedly one of the most difficult things a person can experience. Going through a divorce whilst also working however can seem an impossible task. Here, Weronika Husejko looks at the pressure on divorcing couples and explores how employers are providing support to their divorcing employees.

Most people suffer from an extreme amount of stress when separating from their spouse, the breakdown of the marriage being a significant change to their life. In addition to coping with the emotional side of the break-up, spouses must also deal with the practical side, to formalise the separation, which can be overwhelming.

The majority of separating spouses have financial ties, such as jointly owned property, which will need to be divided. One of the toughest parts of a divorce is usually when the couple must make a decision as to how these assets should be divided, particularly in cases where there are not enough to meet both spouses’ needs.

Dealing with these types of financial matters upon separation is challenging and emotionally draining, particularly for those who end up in Court proceedings, due to their time consuming and costly nature. For example, those in Court proceedings are usually required to comply with several Court directions, including attending Court hearings, which is a stressful experience in itself.

A divorce is therefore very demanding and as a result, it is not uncommon for employees experiencing a marital breakdown to feel torn between their job and their divorce, this often having a detrimental effect on their mental health. Historically speaking this has been something which most employees have unfortunately been expected to endure.

The BBC have however recently reported that some companies are beginning to introduce and build policies which are intended to help their employees in navigating a divorce.

By way of example, some companies are offering benefits such as: –

Paid time off to attend things such as solicitors’ meetings or mediation.
Flexible working arrangements
Access to emotional and mental health support
Access to legal advice

There are also organisations in the UK which are trying to promote more family-friendly policies like those mentioned above to help those going through the breakdown of a relationship. For example, the Positive Parenting Alliance have called for a separation to be recognised as a ‘life event’ by employers in HR policies and have also suggested that employees going through a separation should be offered support by way of counselling if needed.

Tesco is one of the first large companies in the UK to provide their employees with this type of support, as recommended by the Positive Parenting Alliance.

In summary, whether you get any support from your employer during your divorce will be dependent upon their specific company policy, so you may wish to consider speaking to your HR department about the options available to you.

It does seem that there is a shift happening with more companies recognising the difficulties involved in a marital breakdown. In my view, this is a positive shift which also demonstrates an increasing awareness of the importance of mental health generally, which will hopefully result in more people receiving the support they need during what is a very difficult time.

Are pre-nuptial agreements only for the rich and famous?

Posted on 31st August 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Are pre-nuptial agreements only for the rich and famous?

As seen with the ongoing separation of Hollywood star Kevin Costner, pre-nuptial agreements are often considered something that is limited to the super-wealthy or the Hollywood Hills. McAlister Family Law Associate, Aaron Williams, aims to shed light on what prenuptial agreements entail and whether they hold legal weight in the United Kingdom.

Prenuptial agreements, often referred to as “prenups,” are legal documents that couples enter into before marriage or civil partnership to outline the division of assets and financial responsibilities in the event of separation or divorce. A prenuptial agreement is a legally binding contract that helps couples establish financial boundaries and protect their assets in the event of a relationship breakdown. Although these agreements are more commonly associated with high-net-worth individuals, they can benefit any couple looking to safeguard their financial interests.

The primary purpose of a prenup is to provide clarity and certainty regarding the division of assets, debts, and other financial matters. It allows couples to determine how their property, investments, inheritances, and business interests will be divided in the event of separation or divorce. Prenuptial agreements can also address issues such as spousal support and the allocation of debts, providing a comprehensive framework for resolving potential disputes. Prenuptial agreements are legally recognized in the United Kingdom, but their enforceability is subject to the discretion of the courts. While they are not automatically binding, they carry significant weight if certain conditions are met.

To ensure the enforceability of a prenuptial agreement, it must be entered into willingly, with both parties having received independent legal advice and provided full financial disclosure. The agreement should also be fair and reasonable at the time it is made, taking into consideration the future needs of both parties and any children involved. It is important to note that the courts retain the power to depart from the terms of a prenuptial agreement if they deem it unfair in the circumstances. Factors such as the length of the marriage, the welfare of any children, and significant changes in the parties’ financial situations may be considered when determining the enforceability of a prenup.

Prenuptial agreements offer couples a valuable tool for establishing financial arrangements and protecting their assets in case of a relationship breakdown. While not automatically binding in the U.K., a well-drafted and fair prenup, entered into with full disclosure and legal advice, can carry significant weight in court proceedings.

Am I entitled to continue the lifestyle to which I have become accustomed if I divorce?

Posted on 13th July 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Am I entitled to continue the lifestyle to which I have become accustomed if I divorce?

The end of a marriage often leads to a lot of financial worry for those involved. One factor that many are concerned about is will they be able to continue to afford the lifestyle that they had with their spouse during the marriage. Here, McAlister Family Law Partner, Fiona Wood, looks at what the judges will consider when dealing with the financial aspects of a divorce.

When a financial settlement is made in divorce proceedings the judge will have to look at dividing the capital assets and pension assets in a way that meets both spouse’s capital needs (this is usually housing needs, paying debts and funding retirement – if there are reasonable pension provisions). Once the Judge decides what capital and pension assets the spouses will have, they can then consider if one spouse needs spousal maintenance from the other, or a capital sum in lieu of spousal maintenance, to assist them to meet their needs.

A judge has to consider the lifestyle that the couple enjoyed during their marriage, when considering what a fair settlement is. However, if the couple’s assets and incomes are modest, inevitably both their lifestyles will be negatively impacted by them divorcing. The greater the couple’s assets and income the more likely they will receive a financial settlement that allows them to continue the lifestyle that they had during the marriage.

When dealing with the financial aspects of divorce it is usual for both spouses to state how much they need to buy a house, if they are not saying that they want to stay living in the family home. Where there is less capital, both of the couple may have to downsize as part of their divorce settlement. If there are more assets one may be able to keep the family home and the other purchase another property of a similar value. The value of a house that is suitable for each spouse depends upon the couple’s assets and can be a point of dispute between the couple.

Divorcing spouses also need to state their income needs. Not only does this include essential expenditure such as mortgage payments, food and utility bills, it can also include less essential expenditure such as holidays, entertainment, gardeners etc. Those with significant wealth have huge schedules of income needs, including staff, private jets and the funding of several properties. If the couple cannot agree their settlement and a judge has to adjudicate on the issue, it is likely that they will be asked about their stated income needs and to justify them. To justify them they need to show that this is the level that you and your spouse spent at during the marriage. It is the lifestyle that you had.

Judges are critical of those spouses whose income needs are more of a wish list than a reflection of the lifestyle enjoyed during the marriage. For example if you and your spouse only had one holiday a year in Europe, if you are now saying that you need sufficient money from your spouse to fund several holidays a year, including long haul destinations, a judge is unlikely to say that this is reasonable.

You are not automatically entitled to continue the lifestyle to which you have become accustomed if you divorce, but the lifestyle that you enjoyed as a couple is relevant, and if there is sufficient capital and income it is likely to be maintained,

If you are worried about your financial future if you divorce, you should take advice from an expert family lawyer.

Should we open a joint account?

Posted on 22nd June 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Should we open a joint account?

There are lots of decisions to make during a relationship and perhaps even more so when parties begin cohabiting. One of the questions which sometimes comes up is whether or not you should have a joint bank account with your partner? Here, Lisa Brown looks at what a joint account means from the perspective of couples, the bank, and family law.

This is obviously a personal decision and can vary between couples. It can be helpful from a practical point of view if you have a lot of joint expenditure, but it would be sensible to agree some ground rules about usage and how much each party is expected to contribute from the outset.

From the bank’s perspective, for example, if one party were to run up a large overdraft on a joint account, they would still generally consider that to a joint liability. Similarly, from a family law point of view if a cohabiting couple are separating the starting point would be that assets are divided as they are held legally so any savings in a joint account should be shared equally, and any joint borrowing should be borne equally.

To have some clarity between you, it might be sensible to have a cohabitation agreement which can deal with how any assets would be divided on separation (including any joint accounts) and also, if you wish, how outgoings will be met during the relationship.

These agreements are not currently 100% binding, but they are very useful and are becoming more and more popular.

What about if you are married?

Lots of married couples have joint accounts but it is not a pre-requisite, and some choose not to.

Back in February Chloe Madeley hit the headlines when she revealed that she went back to work 8 weeks after giving birth citing the fact that she doesn’t have a joint account with her husband, James Haskell (and presumably that in effect they both financially support themselves).

Whilst obviously it is for every individual couple to decide on their own financial arrangements during their relationship this statement does give the impression that simply because there is no joint account there is no financial links or accountability between Chloe and James.

This is not the case for married couples or those in civil partnerships. The legal starting point is quite different to couples who simply live together. When you enter into a marriage or civil partnership you immediately gain the ability to make a wide range of financial claims against your partner (and likewise they have those claims against you).

If your marriage or civil partnership were to come to an end and you cannot agree how assets should be divided, then the court has the power to divide them between you in line with the factors set out in Section 25 Matrimonial Causes Act. These factors include (amongst other things) the assets and income of each party, length of the relationship and the contributions you have each made.

The court is not bound to consider monies in a joint account joint nor monies in one person’s sole name as money to be retained solely by them.

There can, however, be circumstances where it is relevant where monies have been held. For example, if one party had received an inheritance the court may be more minded to exclude that from any settlement if it had always been kept separate in a sole account.

If you or somebody you know wants to understand their legal position better whether they are cohabiting, thinking about cohabiting, engaged or married they should contact one of our specialist family lawyers today.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning forced marriage, please get in touch with our team at hello@mcalisterfamilylaw.co.uk

Noel Gallagher and Sara MacDonald to divorce after 22 years – Does the length of marriage matter?

Posted on 16th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Noel Gallagher and Sara MacDonald to divorce after 22 years – Does the length of marriage matter?

Noel Gallagher, Manchester born former Oasis member, and his wife, Sara MacDonald have announced that they are to divorce following a marriage of 22 years. Here Weronika Husejko looks at how the length of a marriage can impact divorce proceedings.

The former couple married in 2011, having begun their relationship in 2001. They have two children together, Donovan, aged 15 and Sonny aged 12, both of whom are still dependent.

It is a commonly queried whether the length of a marriage has any relevance within a divorce financial settlement. The short answer to this question would be yes.

When a Judge considers a financial settlement, they must consider section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Section 25, amongst other things, specifies that a Judge must in particular have regard to the duration of the couples’ marriage.

What does this mean in practice?

Generally speaking, a marriage usually falls into one of three brackets, that being either a short term, medium term or long term marriage.

A short term marriage would usually be considered to be one of up to 5 years. It should be noted however that a couple cannot divorce until they have been married for a minimum of 1 year. It is more likely that the financial settlement in a short term marriage will take into consideration pre acquired assets. A “clean break” may be considered to be more appropriate in these circumstances. However, this may not always be the case, especially if there are dependent children involved, in which case the focus would be on ensuring that the children’s needs are met.

A medium term marriage would generally be viewed as around 10 years.

Noel and Sara’s marriage would most likely be considered to be a long marriage on the basis that they began living together around 2001, their marriage being a total of 22 years. This is because a period of cohabitation that moves seamlessly into marriage will also be taken into account by the Courts, when considering the length of the marriage.

A longer marriage of this nature can often be more complex when it comes to the financial settlement. The Courts may take a different approach when dividing matrimonial assets in this type of case, compared to that of a short or medium term marriage. By way of example, it is far less likely for the Court to consider Noel and Sara’s respective contributions to the marriage. As a result, it may be that there will be an equal division of assets, unless it is necessary to move away from a 50-50 split to meet the need of one of the spouses.

It may be that Noel and Sara have a pre nuptial agreement, in which case this may be taken into consideration by the Courts, and therefore may have an impact upon the overall financial settlement.

In any event, the Court’s primary interest in their case will be in ensuring that the needs of both Donovan and Sonny are met.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce issues, please get in touch with our private child team at McAlister Family Law.

Kanye to pay $200,000 / month in child maintenance. What lessons can be learned from the settlements of the ultra-rich?

Posted on 2nd December 20222nd December 2022 by McAlister Family Law

Kanye to pay $200,000 / month in child maintenance. What lessons can be learned from the settlements of the ultra-rich?

In the long line of staggering elements of Kanye West’s most tumultuous year, him agreeing to pay a $200,000 (around £165,000) a month settlement to his ex-wife, Kim Kardashian, for child support, is not even the most surprising or jaw-dropping. Here, Michael Compston discusses how this figure was decided upon and what lessons can be learned from the settlements of the ultra-ultra-rich for the remainder of society.

Before we begin, let’s look at some background. West, or Ye as he now likes to be known, is 45 and Kardashian is 42. They married in 2014 and divorced in 2022, being married for some 8 years. The couple happily had four children together, North (9), Saint (6), Chicago (4) and Psalm (2).

For starters, West and Kardashian have agreed to there being no spousal maintenance being paid to either. This, given their extraordinary wealth – both being estimated as being worth at least $1billion individually in the last twelve months, though West’s current status may be “just” that of a 9-figure millionaire – is perhaps not surprising. What they have agreed is for West to pay the sum of $200,000 a month to Kardashian for child support.

The concept of child support, or child maintenance in England & Wales, is one whereby one parent pays a monthly sum to the other parent to ‘support’ or ‘maintain’ the children. The use of the word ‘maintain’ is perhaps more helpful in understanding what the concept of child support actually is. The children must be maintained in the lifestyle that they have become accustomed to. It is most commonly paid by the parent with whom the children spend less time, though in the West v Kardashian case the arrangements in the US case for the children are seemingly shared. The mechanism by which a court would consider maintenance is paid is found under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, though most separating couples will use the maintenance calculator on the Child Maintenance Service website.

In some cases where the ultra-ultra-rich are not concerned, this might extend to items such as ballet lessons, horse riding, art workshops etc. If the couple used to holiday abroad twice a year, then the children should still be able to do so upon divorce, if it can be afforded. Divorce should not be a reason why a child is not able to continue to take part in the activities that they enjoyed when the family lived together all under one roof.

In cases of the West children, the activities are slightly more extravagant. They will not be staying at chain hotels but staying at the most luxurious accommodation worldwide. It is not uncommon for either parent to fly by private jet; those tickets do not come cheap even for the uber-wealthy. The elder children have become accustomed to that lifestyle and would not be expected to have to go without, irrespective of how detached from the norm we may consider that to be. As a family very much in the “A-List”, there are security costs to ensure their safety. All of this has a cost, even to the billionaires.

Schooling is often a big factor. As part of financial settlements upon divorce in England and Wales, the court can make specific school fees orders that ensure a child is kept in the level of education to which they have become accustomed. The West children all attend a fee-paying school and if this was being dealt with in England and Wales it would not be expected to stop attending that school, or a school of similar standing especially as they progress from elementary (primary) to high (secondary) school, because of their parent’s divorce. It is understood that the couple have agreed to share the school fees, which will have been factored into the $200,000 a month payment; not only this, but college funds will need to have been carefully considered for all four.

West and Kardashian have, perhaps sensibly, avoided the need for a trial by reaching a settlement. This is behaviour that would be encouraged regardless of the parties’ wealth and behaviour that we would encourage in those individuals struggling to reach an agreement. By avoiding the trial, they have avoided the considerable expense and emotional difficulty of having their finances and activities laid bare in front a judge, before a decision is made without necessarily having their agreement.

The same principle applies in the ‘real world’, In England and Wales if you attend a final hearing on finances, you are handing over the power to make decisions to a Judge. Negotiations beforehand may result in an outcome that, whilst not ticking every box, might just be a better settlement for both, rather than risk a Judge falling closer to the opponent’s side of the spectrum than yours.

West’s 2022 has been chaotic, to say the least. He has lost a number of endorsements as a result of anti-semitic rants and has been suspended from Twitter. Mega companies such as Adidas and Balenciaga have cut all ties with him. This will no doubt impact his finances for years to come and it may be that the $200,000 a month payment to Kardashian is unaffordable in the future. West will need to bring the matter back to court and provide sufficient evidence that his means have dwindled to the extent he cannot pay the sum agreed. The same principle operates in any settlement in England and Wales; if there is a material change in the financial circumstance of the paying party, then it is only fair that a reassessment be considered. A party cannot simply choose not to work or not be employed to an appropriate standard to try and frustrate the other parent; it is unlikely that if the case was being dealt with over here we would see West stacking shelves in a supermarket any time soon, as he would be accused of failing to maximise his earning potential.

If you are affected by any of the issues raised here, please get in touch today. We are here to help.

How would Stallone’s alleged misconduct sit with the Courts of England and Wales?

Posted on 1st September 202224th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

How would Stallone’s alleged misconduct sit with the Courts of England and Wales?

Sylvester Stallone hit the headlines once again recently, after news broke that his wife of some 25 years, Jennifer Flavin, had filed for divorce. In his latest blog post, George Wilson takes a closer look at how Stallone’s alleged misconduct would sit with the Courts of England and Wales.

The divorce suit was filed just days before a video emerged of Stallone, now 76 years old, covering up a tattoo of Flavin on his bicep with a picture of Butkus, the bull mastiff from the Rocky film franchise. Although Stallone was not shy about disclosing the video to the world at large, it has been alleged by Flavin that he hasn’t quite disclosed things he should have and has hidden marital assets within the divorce proceedings. Flavin’s legal team further state that the Stallone has:

“engaged in the intentional dissipation, depletion and/or waste of marital assets which has had an adverse economic impact on the marital estate”

Naturally, Stallone’s solicitors have denied any sort of misconduct.

How would Stallone’s alleged misconduct sit with the Courts of England and Wales?

In the jurisdiction of England and Wales, all parties to financial remedy proceedings within divorce owe a duty of full and frank financial disclosure to the Court and, in turn, their spouse. Essentially, parties within the proceedings must disclose all of the available information about their assets and income, by way of detailed financial disclosure, usually on the standard document used for such disclosure, Form E. Such disclosure will include evidence of the value of properties parties have an interest in, copies of bank statements linked to bank accounts in their name, evidence of their income and income needs, evidence of other assets such as investments and ISAs, valuable chattels such as artwork, jewellery, and watches, and motor vehicles.

Parties will also need to provide evidence of dividend counterfoils, company accounts, tax returns, and any liabilities they might have against their name. This list is by no means exhaustive, and parties are often shocked at how much detail they are required to provide within their financial disclosure. A blank Form E can be found at this link for ease of reference.

If parties to a divorce refuse, or fail to provide the required disclosure, the consequences (and remedies available to the Court and their spouse) are very serious. The court is likely to draw “adverse inferences” about parties who fail to provide the required disclosure. Essentially, this means that the Court can, and will, assume a spouse has something to hide and can make robust assumptions about the trust value of their assets and level of their income. Furthermore, if the divorce (and financial remedy proceedings) has concluded and one spouse believes that their ex-spouse had hidden assets, it may be possible to reopen the case. The court can reopen any case if it finds there has been deliberate and fraudulent non-disclosure of assets by one spouse.

Such assets, now visible and disclosed, will come under scrutiny, and the court can decide as to how the same should be divided. Perhaps the worst outcome of being found ‘guilty’ of non-disclosure, is the Court finding that a spouse has been in contempt of court and if the contempt has been deliberate, then the guilty spouse can be fined or even have a custodial sentence forced upon them. It is therefore of paramount important to work with a solicitor to ensure that the disclosure you provide is full and frank.

Stallone has also been accused of dissipating marital assets. Dissipation of assets occurs when one spouse has used, given away or otherwise transferred, converted, wasted, mismanaged, or adversely affected assets that would have been subject to division and distribution. Dissipation of assets may be in the form of the quick sale of assets such as property, stocks and shares, or other chattels such as artwork. Dissipation can also be more subtle and can be in the form of significant ‘gifts’ to friends and family, substantial cash withdrawals, gambling, or other unusual and possible reckless purchases. The court will see such dissipation of assets as an act of litigation misconduct.

Under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, it is possible for one spouse to apply to freeze certain assets belonging to the other, to reduce the risk that they are dissipated. In such circumstances, it is essential to act quickly, with the assistance of solicitor, should you suspect that your spouse intends to dissipate assets, as it is much more difficult to deal with the assets once they have been dissipated.