For richer for poorer

Resolving the finances comes as an inevitable consequence of any marriage breakdown. For some couples a “clean break” is preferable. This severs any ongoing financial ties between the husband and wife. For many families, in particular where there are young children, this may not be practical or desirable. If one party has the primary care of the children, there is a big disparity in incomes, or there is simply not enough money available, maintenance may be ordered or agreed.

Maintenance for children will terminate either when the children reach the age of 18 or cease their education (school or university). Maintenance for a spouse is less arbitrary. The payment term can be a defined period, i.e. for a few years to allow the recipient to get back on their feet, or for much longer. In a long marriage with young children it is not unusual to reach a financial settlement where maintenance is paid on a “joint lives” basis – until the death of the payer.

Unlike capital settlements, maintenance is not set in stone. If there is a significant change in either party’s circumstances then an application to vary can be lodged at the court. This flexibility is vital where orders can span decades. The payee’s co-habitation or the loss of a job are common triggers behind an such an application. The current economic climate has inevitably generated a rash of court action as people struggle to adjust to reduced financial circumstances.

Where “joint lives” orders have been made, the paying party’s retirement and consequent income reduction make an application to vary almost inevitable. In all cases, for an application to be successful, the judge will need to be satisfied that the change in circumstances is significant and long term.

Payment of maintenance, although vital to meet the families’ ongoing needs, can create animosity and keep the parties allied to one another for years after the relationship has broken down. The paying party, usually the husband, may resentful about the ongoing liability. The receiving party, usually the wife, may feel insecure about their financial dependency.

However, all is not lost. Even if a clean break was not achievable at the time of the initial settlement, changes to the parties’ circumstances may mean it becomes realistic in the future. On retirement, if the wife receives a share of the husband’s pension or has her own pension provision, the parties may have similar income levels. At this stage it may be appropriate for the maintenance to reduce on a nominal level, or be dismissed entirely. Alternatively, if the husband has had the opportunity to build up capital during his working life he may be in a position to” capitalise” and buy out the wife’s further claims with a lump sum.

It is vital to consult a specialist family law solicitor to ensure that you receive the appropriate advice for your individual situation.

If you have any queries about this article please contact jonesnickolds on 0203 405 2300 or contact@jonesnickolds.co.uk