Thursday, August 16, 2007

Clarity or flexibility?

The Times yesterday reported that Euromillions lottery winner Angela Kelly has promised to share her £35 million winnings with her estranged husband, even though under Scottish law she has no obligation to do so. The report highlights the difference between Scottish and English law - under the Scottish system assets acquired after the parties separate are apparently "largely irrelevant" to the divorce settlement, whereas under the English system the starting point is equal division of all assets, and it is purely at the discretion of the judge whether assets acquired after separation should be excluded.

Which system is best? Clarity/certainty or flexibility/uncertainty? I know where my vote goes.

1 comment:

  1. There seems to be little justification for allowing post separation acquired assets or wealth to form part of any settlement unless it has been deliberately withheld for the purpose of avoiding property becoming part of the joint assets, in which case evidence should be allowed to be adduced to that effect... P :-)


Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.