H v H

CourtRoyal Court
JudgeV. J. Obbard
Judgment Date18 June 2008
Neutral Citation[2008] JRC 97A
Date18 June 2008

[2008] JRC 97A


(Family Division)


V. J. Obbard, Registrar (sitting alone).

In the Matter of the Wife's Application for an Interim Lump Sum


Advocate A. D. Hoy for the Petitioner.

Advocate M. E. Whittaker for the Respondent.


Matrimonial Causes Jersey Law 1949, as amended.


This is an application for an interim lump sum in accordance with the provisions of Article 29(2)(a) of the Matrimonial Causes Jersey Law 1949, as amended.


In order to understand the technicalities it is necessary to quote parts of Article 29:-.

" Financial provision for party to a marriage in cases of divorce etc:-

" (1) Where a decree of divorce, nullity of marriage or judicial separation has been made, the court may, having regard to all the circumstances of the case including the conduct of the parties to the marriage insofar as it may be inequitable to disregard it and to their actual and potential financial circumstances, order -

a) ...

b) that one party to the marriage shall pay to the other party to the marriage such lump sum or sums as the court may think reasonable whether or not any sum is ordered to be paid under sub-paragraph (a);

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1)(b), an order under this Article that one party to the marriage shall pay a lump sum to the other party to the marriage -

(a) may be made for the purpose of enabling that other party to meet any liabilities or expenses reasonably incurred by him or her in maintaining himself or herself or any child of the family before the making of an application for an order under this Article."


In this case the wife is asking the husband for an interim lump sum:-

  • (a) towards her living expenses till she secures permanent employment;

  • (b) to pay her present debts of about £7,000 and her rent;

  • (c) towards her legal fees;

  • (d) on account of a final lump sum to be awarded.


With regard to possibility of the award of a final lump sum, it is appropriate to mention that the husband is a farmer and that the former matrimonial home is a farm house which the husband owns jointly with his brother. There is a little adjoining land but a greater part of the land farmed by the husband is owned by his mother.


The farming venture does not appear to be very successful. The wife complains that the husband's potato crop, presently only half dug, has been sold, at an undervalue, to his father. Nevertheless it was indicated to me that the wife may be considering proceeding with a claim for lump sum based on her share in the home and the farming business.


With regard to her more immediate needs, the wife used to run her dog kennels from the farm. When the marriage broke down she not only left home...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • S v T
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 22 May 2018
    ...v Currey [2006] EWCA Civ 1338 . Matrimonial Causes Rules 2005. Matrimonial Causes (Jersey) Law 1949. WS v HS [2018] EWFC 11 . H v H [2008] JRC 097A . Matrimonial Causes Act 1975. O v O [2005] JLR 535 . de Lasala v de Lasala [1979] 2 All ER 1146 . S -v- T (Matrimonial) [2016] JRC 223B .......

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