Pamela Rosemary White v Martin Edward John White
Pamela Rosemary White v Martin Edward John White
- 2000
[2001] AC 596 (HL), 26 October 2000. Considers the fair division of property in divorce. M appealed and P cross-appealed from a CA judgment that increased P's lump sum provision from one-fifth to two-fifths of the parties' total assets. Both M and P were farmers. The original decision had been to satisfy P's housing and financial needs and allow M to take sole control of the farm business to continue farming. P's wish to have enough money to buy a farm of her own was considered unreasonable. "Held": Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed. The original judge had erred. There is no justification to conclude that the assets of one party become immaterial once the financial needs of the other are satisfied.
WHITE V WHITE
England and Wales--1543-
[2001] AC 596 (HL), 26 October 2000. Considers the fair division of property in divorce. M appealed and P cross-appealed from a CA judgment that increased P's lump sum provision from one-fifth to two-fifths of the parties' total assets. Both M and P were farmers. The original decision had been to satisfy P's housing and financial needs and allow M to take sole control of the farm business to continue farming. P's wish to have enough money to buy a farm of her own was considered unreasonable. "Held": Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed. The original judge had erred. There is no justification to conclude that the assets of one party become immaterial once the financial needs of the other are satisfied.
WHITE V WHITE
England and Wales--1543-