X v X, Court of Appeal - Family Division, November 09, 2001, [2002] 1 FLR 508,[2002] Fam Law 98,[2001] EWHC 11 (Fam)
Linked as:
Extract
X v X, Court of Appeal - Family Division, November 09, 2001, [2002] 1 FLR 508,[2002] Fam Law 98,[2001] EWHC 11 (Fam)
BAILII Citation Number: [2001] EWHC 11 (Fam)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICEFAMILY DIVISIONPRINCIPAL REGISTRYRoyal Courts of Justice Date: Friday 9th November 2001Before:MR JUSTICE MUNBY(In Private)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X v X (Y and Z intervening)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Mr Martin Pointer QC appeared on behalf of the Applicant husband (the Respondent in the suit)Mr Jeremy Posnansky QC appeared on behalf of the Respondent wife (the Petitioner in the suit)Mr Irvine MacCabe appeared on behalf of the wife=s brother and a firm of solicitors- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -JudgmentMR JUSTICE MUNBY:1 This is an application by a husband (as I shall refer to him although the marriage has now been terminated by a decree absolute) requiring the wife, in accordance with Dean v Dean [1978] Fam 161, to show cause why minutes of order giving effect to an agreement said by him to have been arrived at between them should not be made an order of the court. Not altogether unusually in cases of this kind the wife resists the enforcement of her agreement. What is perhaps somewhat unusual is that, looked at from one perspective, the basis of her objection is not that the husband has agreed to pay her too little but that she has agreed to pay him too much.The facts2 The case is one of very substantial - on one view enormous - wealth. The husband and the wife are both Jewish. Religious, cultural and social obligations lie at the heart of the case. In the light of the arguments that have been addressed to me I need to go through the history, including the history of the negotiations, in some detail.3 The husband is in his forties, the wife in her thirties. They married in 1995. There are no children. The marriage had broken down by January 2001, when the parties separated. Shortly after their separation gossip appeared in the media about the wife=s alleged relationship with another man. On 7 February 2001 the wife=s solicitors wrote to the husband saying she had reached the conclusion the marriage could not be saved and indicating that she would like to formalise the separation and proceed to a divorce in a civilised manner. On 14 February the husband=s solicitors replied that they were instructed to issue divorce proceedings based on the wife=s alleged adultery. I should add that both the wife=s solicitors and the husband=s solicitors are very well known firms with very considerable experience and expertise in handling the divorce cases of the cosmopolitan and the very wealthy.4 On either 15 or 18 February (which is not altogether clear, though nothing turns on the point) there was a meeting between the husband and the wife=s father. I shall have to return in due course to the evidence of what took place during this meeting but for the moment it suffices to record that on 19 February the wife=s solicitor wrote a without prejudice letter to the husband=s solicitors:I am instructed that your client met with my client=s father yesterday, and that they reached agreement as follows;- 1. Your client will give mine a Get forthwith. 2. A payment will be made to your client of ,500,000 in full and final settlement. 3. The payment to your client will be made upon the Get being given or the Decree Nisi and the making of the Order, whichever is later. 4. Your client will not issue a divorce petition. My client will issue a petition based on your client=s unreasonable behaviour. Neither party wishes for there to be any unpleasantness and the particulars will be drafted in anodyne terms. I attach a copy of the proposed particulars for your client to review. If he objects to any of them, my client will agree to amend them. Please let me know. 5. There will be no order as to costs, both with respect to the divorce and finances. 6. There is to be a clean break between the parties.Please confirm by midday on Wednesday that this is all agreed and that this concludes all issues arising from the marriage and its breakdown.The above is conditional on Minutes being agreed and signed within the next seven days.@5 The husband=s solicitor replied on 20 February, again without prejudice:Thank you for your letter of 19th February upon which I have taken instructions. 1. I am instructed that my client will give a Get once the ,500,000 is paid into my client account which will be paid over (together with any interest thereon) upon the Get being obtained. Therefore once I have the funds and the Minutes of Order have been signed by our respective clients and firms, the parties can get the Get. 2. So far as the divorce proceedings, I enclose herewith the particulars which my client will accept. 3. I am instructed that part of the agreement was that your client would transfer to our client the Merc...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
