Le Geyt v Mallett and Rodrigues

JurisdictionJersey
CourtRoyal Court
JudgeCrill, Bailiff:
Judgment Date08 July 1993
Date08 July 1993
ROYAL COURT
Crill, Bailiff:

The Deputy Judicial Greffier appeared in person.

Mrs. S.A. Pearmain for the petitioner;

S. Slater for the respondent.

Cases cited:

(1) Bennett v. Bennett, [1952] 1 K.B. 249; [1952] 1 All E.R. 413; [1952] 1 T.L.R. 400.

(2) Davstone Estates Ltd.'s Leases, In re, Manprop Ltd. v. O'Dell, [1969] 2 Ch. 378; [1969] 2 All E.R. 849; (1969), 20 P. & C.R. 395; 113 Sol. Jo. 366.

(3) Doucet v. Hancock, 1982 J.J. 237, considered.

(4) Goodinson v. Goodinson, [1954] 2 Q.B. 118; [1954] 2 All E.R. 255; (1954), 98 Sol. Jo. 369.

(5) Hyman v. Hyman, [1929] A.C. 601; [1929] All E.R. Rep. 245; (1929), 141 L.T. 329; 45 T.L.R. 444; 98 L.J.P. 81; 27 L.G.R. 379; 93 J.P. 209; 73 Sol. Jo. 317.

(6) L v. L, [1962] P. 101; [1961] 3 All E.R. 849; (1961), 105 Sol. Jo. 930, applied.

(7) Mills v. Mills, [1940] P. 124; [1940] 2 All E.R. 254; (1940), 163 L.T. 272; 56 T.L.R. 561; 109 L.J.P. 86; 84 Sol. Jo. 253.

(8) Rennell v. Le Mière, Royal Ct., April 30th, 1993, unreported, distinguished.

Additional cases cited by counsel:

Day v. Hibbs, Royal Ct., April 12th, 1988, unreported.

Russell v. Russell, [1956] P. 283.

Stephens (née Baureiss) v. Stephens, 1989 JLR 284.

Whitwham v. Bashforth, Royal Ct., July 27th, 1989, unreported.

Text cited:

Cretney, Principles of Family Law, 4th ed., at 898-899 (1984).

Family Law—financial provision—maintenance agreement—ratification by court—maintenance agreement precluding future change in parties' financial arrangements may not fetter jurisdiction of court—Royal Court may ratify fair and just agreement submitted for approval, even if amounts to "clean break"—ratified agreement bars further claims by parties

The petitioner and respondent sought ratification by the Royal Court of a "clean break" agreement following the breakdown of their marriage.

Following their separation, the petitioner and the respondent made a maintenance agreement which was expressed to be binding on them and which purported to exclude any future claim by either party for further financial support from the other. This agreement was submitted to the Matrimonial Causes and Probate Division of the Royal Court for ratification but the Deputy Judicial Greffier refused to ratify it.

On his representation to the Royal Court for a declaration, inter alia, as to whether he had been bound to refuse to ratify the agreement, the court considered the principles upon which it should act in dealing with such agreements.

Held, making the following ruling:

Whilst no maintenance agreement could fetter the jurisdiction of the court to order or to vary an order for financial provision, an agreement such as the present one, which contained a purportedly binding provision precluding any future change in the parties' financial arrangements and which had been fairly and freely negotiated between them, could be ratified by the court, the existence of such an agreement being an important factor for the court to consider in determining a just outcome. Furthermore, although the English law on "clean break" settlements could not be imported into the law of Jersey, a court order giving effect to such an agreement acted as a bar to further application by the parties and a binding agreement could accordingly be made in appropriate circumstances, even though it might effectively amount to a "clean break." The Deputy...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • H v J
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 31 March 2021
    ...AC 601 Matrimonial Causes (Jersey) Law 1949 Matrimonial Causes Rules 2005 Family Procedure Rules 2010 Le Geyt v Mallett and Rodrigues [1993] JLR 103 L v V [2004] JLR Note 6 Matrimonial. THE REGISTRAR: 1 I am asked to deliver reasons explaining my decision to refuse to give effect to a draft......
  • II
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 18 November 2010
    ... (2010) UKSC 12. LM v Medway Council (2007) EWCA Civ 9. In the matter of C [2009] JLR 353. Children (Jersey) Law 2002. Le Geyt v Mallett [1993] JLR 103. Edgar v Edgar (1981) WLR 1410. MacLeod v Macleod (2010) 1 AC 298. Rennell v Le Miere (5th April 1995) Jersey unreported. L v V [2004] JRC......
  • L v M
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 11 October 2016
    ...Causes (Jersey) Law 1949. Howarth v McBride [1984] JJ 1 (JLR 1) . Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Le Geyt v Mallett and Rodrigues [1993] JLR 103 . Sharland v Sharland [2015] 2 FLR 1367 . Radmacher (formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 , [2010] 2 FLR 1900. F v F [1995] 2 FLR 45 . Cro......
  • L v M
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 18 April 2017
    ...Howarth v McBride [1984] JJ 1 . Matrimonial Causes (Jersey) Law 1949. Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Le Geyt v Mallett and Rodrigues [1993] JLR 103 . Sharland v Sharland [2015] 2 FLR 1367 . Radmacher (formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 , [2010] 2 FLR 1900. Miller/McFarlane [2006] ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT