Search results
Jun 16, 2014 · The case I am referring to is Wachtel v Wachtel, decided by the Court of Appeal in 1973. It concerned a husband’s appeal against a financial order following divorce, and it was important because it was the first time that the Court of Appeal had considered the new (and, essentially, still current) regime for deciding financial settlements ...
- Facts
- Issue
- Decision
- Reasoning
- Analysis
- Conclusion
The husband, a dentist in good practice, filed for divorce on 18th April, 1972, alleging adultery by the wife with a doctor whose patient she was. The wife denied the allegations. The divorce was granted on the ground that the marriage had irretrievably broken down and the responsibility for the breakdown rested equally on both parties. The husband...
Whether the judge's order for financial provision was just and in accordance with the provisions of the 1970 Act.
The Court upheld the judge's order for financial provision, ruling that the wife was entitled to a share of the matrimonial home and periodical payments to support her. The Court also held that the judge had properly considered the wife's earning capacity and conduct, and that the 1970 Act gave the Court power to effect a transfer of assets from on...
The Court noted that the 1970 Act was a reforming statute designed to facilitate the granting of ancillary relief in cases where marriages had been dissolved under the 1969 Act. The Court held that the Act gave the Court power to effect a transfer of assets from one spouse to the other, and that the wife was entitled to a share of the matrimonial h...
This case highlights the importance of the 1970 Act in providing for ancillary relief in cases of divorce. The Act gives the Court power to effect a transfer of assets from one spouse to the other, and requires the Court to consider a range of factors when making an order for financial provision. The case also illustrates the difficulties faced by ...
The Court upheld the judge's order for financial provision, ruling that the wife was entitled to a share of the matrimonial home and periodical payments to support her. The Court also held that the judge had properly considered the wife's earning capacity and conduct, and that the 1970 Act gave the Court power to effect a transfer of assets from on...
The Family Law Act 1996 (see below) was intended to give a new importance to such mediation, by making it a prerequisite to the granting of a divorce, and s.22 of the Act, authorising the allocation of public funds to marriage support services, was among the first sections to be brought into force.
2. Mr. and Mrs. Wachtel were married on 9th January 1954. They were both then 28 years of age. They have two children, a son aged now 14, and a girl of 11. The husband is a dentist in good practice. On 31st March, 1972, there left the home. On 21st July, 1972, there was a divorce on the ground that the marriage had irretrievably broken down.
- THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS
- 08 February 1973
- [1973] EWCA Civ J0208-2
- England & Wales
/ Bringing an end to the matrimonial post mortem: Wachtel v Wachtel and its enduring significance for ancillary relief. In: Gilmore, S., Herring, J. and Probert, R. eds. Landmark Cases in Family Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 135-154. Landmark Cases in Family Law. editor / Stephen Gilmore ; Jonathan Herring ; Rebecca Probert.
The judgment which I am about to read is the judgment of the Court. Mr. and Mrs. Wachtel were married on 9th January 1954. They were both then 28 years of age. They have two children, a son aged now 14, and a girl of 11. The husband is a dentist in good practice. On 31st March, 1972, the wife left the home.
Nov 10, 2021 · Appeal from – Wachtel v Wachtel FD 3-Oct-1972. Mr. Justice Ormrod ordered the husband to pay to his wife (i) a lump sum of pounds 10,000, or half the value of the former matrimonial home in Norwood, South London, whichever be the less: (ii) a periodical payment of pounds 1,500 per annum, less . . Cited by:
