Non-Disclosure in Financial Remedy Cases and the Impact on the Settlement Reached
Following the two important cases of Sharland v Sharland and Gohil v Gohil it seems there are still cases where a party is failing to provide full and frank disclosure. These two cases highlighted the consequences of failing to comply with the duty of full and frank disclosure.
In the Case of Sharland v Sharland the final order was set aside due to the fraudulent non-disclosure by the husband and in the case of Gohil v Gohil, part of the final order was set aside due to the husband’s material non-disclosure of assets.
What happens if you learn after your final Order on finances that your spouse had more money?
If you discover after your financial remedies case has concluded that your former spouse has in fact got other assets that he or she has not disclosed as part of the financial settlement and it is a substantial amount, then you may need to make a further application to the Court to set aside or vary the final Financial Order.
What should you do on learning this?
First and foremost you must act quickly upon receiving this information as time is of the essence. It is imperative that you contact a solicitor immediately to discuss the Financial Order that was made in the proceedings and the new information that you have received. If the disclosure is material disclosure then the Court may be persuaded to set aside the final order made in the proceedings. However the onus will be on the person bringing the case to prove that the other person did not provide full and frank disclosure. This means proving that the asset or income was known at the time but simply was not disclosed or was significantly downplayed which of course could amount to misrepresentation of the facts. If you require any further information or just need a chat, call one of the team on 01895 201 700