ON APPEAL FROM GUILDFORD COUNTY COURT
HIS HONOUR JUDGE RYLANCE
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE
LORD JUSTICE STANLEY BURNTON
|- and -
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
165 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2DY
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court )
The Respondent appeared in person.
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Thorpe:
"(1) It is both parties' intention the wife will become financially independent from the husband within five years of this order.
2) The wife shall keep the husband informed that any increase to her current income of £1,000 per month or more which takes place at any point during the term of any maintenance order in her favour."
"The husband shall pay... periodical payments at the rate of £1,000 per month starting on 24 January 2005... for a period of five years until 24 December 2009"
"The Wife produced some minimal evidence to show that she has attempted to find a job recently; she has done some unpaid work experience, and has sent her cv to a few prospective employers. But she has made no serious attempt to ensure that her skills are up to date or relevant, and is still clearly unwilling to work, wondering how she would have the time to do the housework and look after the children if she had to work. The Husband is (rightly) critical of the Wife in this regard, particularly in the light of the agreement between the parties that the Wife would be self sufficient by the end of this year".
"It was probably not until the Wife heard the Husband's evidence that she was able to understand his slightly complicated financial situation and the employment packages that he has had over the years. This is a very unsatisfactory situation and has ratcheted up the costs of these proceedings and the level of mistrust from the Wife."
"The court will be aware that 8.1 appeals against decisions of ancillary relief are subject to the general rules on appeal. Accordingly the general basis for allowing an appeal is that the decision of the court below was ' wrong' (CPR 1998 R52.11(3)) with respect to:
[i] the law
[ii] the facts, albeit to a restrictive degree (Piglowski v Piglowska  2 FLR 763); and,
[iii] Where a decision is based on judicial discretion the decision must be shown to be 'plainly wrong'. Only if the decision made is so plainly wrong that he must be given far too much weight to a particular factor is the appellate Court entitled to interfere (G v G  FLR 894; V v V  2 FLR 697)
And then there are references to the authorities of G v G  FLR 894 and V v V  2 FLR 697.
Lord Justice Longmore:
Lord Justice Stanley Burnton:
Order: Application for permission to appeal granted; Appeal allowed