SITTING AT LUTON
B e f o r e :
____________________
TO | Applicant |
|
- and - |
||
GA | Respondent |
|
TO v GA (Financial Remedies: Deferred Sale) |
____________________
Charlotte McDonald (instructed by Abbott Solicitors) for the Respondent Husband
Hearing date: 11-12 November 2024
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Deputy District Judge Mark Harrop:
Introduction
Introduction
The Family
The Parties
My Observations on the Parties
The Law
''In all these cases it is one of the paramount considerations, in applying the s 25 criteria, to endeavour to stretch what is available to cover the need of each for a home, particularly where there are young children involved. Obviously the primary carer needs whatever is available to make the main home for the children, but it is of importance, albeit of lesser importance, that the other parent should have a home of his own where the children can enjoy their contact time with him. Of course, there are cases where there is not enough to provide a home for either. Of course, there are cases where there is only enough to provide one. But in any case where there is, by stretch and a degree of risk-taking, the possibility of a division to enable both to rehouse themselves, that is an exceptionally important consideration and one which will almost invariably have a decisive impact on outcome.''
The Parties' Respective Needs
i) The wife has given me examples of one-bedroom flats on the market for between £110,000 and £120,000. All are easy to find problems with and none is in the least bit desirable;
ii) The husband has provided examples of far nicer looking one-bedroom houses available for between £180,000 and £225,000. I assume, if it were necessary, that a one-bedroom flat could be secured for less than the cost of a one-bedroom house;
iii) The husband has provided examples of three-bedroom houses available for between £295,000 and £315,000 which he says would be suitable for the wife;
iv) Finally, the wife has provided examples of four-bedroom properties on the market for between £400,000 and £475,000. It was pointed out to her that these were valued higher than the current five-bedroom family home and she acknowledged that these came from a more expensive area (that was more convenient for the children's schools) as there was nothing for sale where she currently lives. I remind myself that needs are to be assessed with reference to the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage and that in the ordinary course of things one would expect divorce to lead to a drop, rather than an improvement, in the standard of living and so I do not find the final properties particularly helpful.
The Parties' Proposals