Richardson v Richardson and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Thorpe,Lord Justice Elias |
| Judgment Date | 29 July 2010 |
| Neutral Citation | [2010] EWCA Civ 1060 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | Case No: B4/2010/0859(A) |
| Date | 29 July 2010 |
[2010] EWCA Civ 1060
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION
MANCHESTER DISTRICT REGISTRY
(His Honour Judge Raynor QC)
Before: Lord Justice Thorpe
and
Lord Justice Elias
Case No: B4/2010/0859(A)
Mr N Dyer QC and Miss J Chapman (instructed by DWF LLP) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.
Miss Harrison (instructed by Pannone Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Respondent.
Lord Justice Thorpe:
Permission to appeal was given on 7 May, and for the second time a stay was granted in relation to the payment of lump sum instalments falling due between that date and the date of the fixture. It seems that this appeal will be heard on 8 October, although overtures must be made by counsel's clerk to the listing officer today to ensure that she extends her current allocation of one and-a-half hours to a full day.
That reduces the scale of the dispute between the parties, created by the issue on 29 May of an application for the variation or discharge of the stay. An instalment fell due for payment on 30 June in the sum of £288,000. In addition, the estate of the deceased applicant in the ancillary relief proceedings has been short of interest due on the lump sum. The interest has, under the pressure of this fixture today, been paid up to 7 May, but Mr Dyer for the appellant has given an assurance that, whatever our ruling, interest will be paid, presumably for the months May/June through to September/October. So the focus must be upon the unpaid June instalment of £288,000.
On the one hand, Mr Dyer says that the respondent has no need. On the other hand, the respondent says that without the money he will be hard-pressed to deal with the mortgagees and to maintain working capital for the business. It is hard for us to resolve these disputed positions.
Accordingly, it seems to me as a matter of principle that the order below stands, unless a clear case has been demonstrated for the maintenance of the stay. I...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Db v Dlj
...[2013] 4 All ER 673, [2013] 3 WLR 1. Reid v Reid[2003] EWHC 2878 (Fam), [2004] 1 FLR 736. Richardson v Richardson[2011] EWCA Civ 79, [2011] 1 FCR 301, [2011] 2 FLR S v S (Arbitral Award: Approval) (Practice Note)[2014] EWHC 7 (Fam), [2014] 2 FCR 484, [2014] 1 WLR 2299, [2014] 1 FLR 1257. Sh......
-
M v M
...1. R v IRC, ex p TC Coombs & Co [1991] 3 All ER 623, [1991] 2 AC 283, [1991] 2 WLR 682, HL. Richardson v Richardson[2011] EWCA Civ 79, [2011] 1 FCR 301, [2011] 2 FLR Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] AC 22, [1885–89] All ER Rep 33, HL. Shephard v Cartwright [1954] 3 All ER 649, [1955] AC ......
-
BC v BG
...[2011] 1 AC 534, [2010] 3 FCR 583, [2010] 3 WLR 1367, [2011] 1 All ER 373, [2010] 2 FLR 1900. Richardson v Richardson[2011] EWCA Civ 79, [2011] 1 FCR 301, [2011] 2 FLR S v S (arbitral award: approval) (Practice Note)[2014] EWHC 7 (Fam), [2014] 2 FCR 484, [2014] 1 WLR 2299, [2014] 1 FLR 1257......
-
Richardson v Richardson and Another
...due on or before 30 June 2010 have been paid (the latter after this court had on 29 July 2010 lifted the stay granted on 7 May 2010: [2010] EWCA Civ 1060). The further instalments of £1,203,830 due on or before 31 December 2010 and £396,170 due on or before 30 June 2011 (a total of £1,600,......