Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articlesrss feeds
When two worlds collide: the 1970 Hague Evidence Convention and the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention
Dr Onyója Momoh, Barrister, 5 Pump Court ChambersMost will agree that the relationship between the 1980 and 1996 Hague Conventions is a match made in heaven. However, the intersection between the 1970...
Familial relationships following a traditional surrogacy arrangement
Mary Welstead, Visiting Professor in Family law University of BuckinghamIn January 2024, Theis J declined to discharge a child arrangements order for contact between a surrogate mother and a...
Practical enforcement
James Snelus, No 5 ChambersA look at some of the problems that can be encountered when enforcing financial remedy orders.  The article is not a comprehensive overview. It briefly considers how to...
Cremation and the family: some burning issues
Andrew Bainham, Emeritus Reader in Family Law and Policy, University of CambridgeIn this article the author considers the law and practice surrounding modern cremation and the cremation aspects...
Changes to cost limits for Child Abduction and Wardship
Cost Update for Child Abduction and WardshipWhen reviewing current costs limitation for Child Abduction and Wardship it has been agreed following consultation and feedback that the cost limit for the...
View all articles
Authors

The strange arithmetic of deferred charges

Sep 29, 2018, 22:02 PM
Family Law, divorce, financial remedies, Mesher order, Martin order
Title : The strange arithmetic of deferred charges
Slug : the-strange-arithmetic-of-deferred-charges
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Jul 11, 2018, 06:30 AM
Article ID : 117263

Mesher and Martin orders, together with their close relation the deferred charge, are usually used only as a last resort. However they do still have a place as a solution in financial remedy proceedings, especially where the only asset of substance is the family home.

In Mesher and Martin orders the non-occupying spouse remains as a legal owner of the home but equitable shares are declared, together with triggering events for the realisation of the non-occupying spouse’s share.

Deferred charges are usually preferred to Mesher and Martin orders where possible, because the property can then be transferred into the occupying spouse’s sole name with the non-occupying spouse being released from the mortgage.

Where there is a deferred charge there is a choice as to whether the non-occupying spouse’s share should be expressed as a percentage of the gross value of the home or as a percentage of the equity. Advisers should be aware that the financial outcomes can be very different. Melanie Craig's article in the July 2018 issue of Family Law ([2018] Fam Law 889) considers the relative merits of the alternative formulations and points to potential pitfalls for the unwary.


The full version of this article appears in the July 2018 issue of Family Law

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of Family Law journal. Please quote: 100482.
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
House
Product Bucket :
Related Articles