Aug 24
I have a confession to make…..I don’t watch TV soaps. I refused to watch “The Split”, quite apart from the fact that it was somewhat of a busman’s holiday (for those uninitiated – it was about a firm of family lawyers), but the main character wore a white jacket to the office in the first episode, I knew that this was going to be an hour of me shouting at the TV that this is not how family law is at all. I am informed by several colleagues that it was in fact a very good programme – pristine white jackets aside!
One of my colleagues from our excellent Trusts, Wills and Estates team asked me about the present storyline from Emmerdale involving a couple, Jai and his estranged wife, Laurel in a mediation setting where Jai is hiding his assets to gain a greater share in their bitter divorce. Does this really happen?
Hidden assets are those which one party deliberately fails to disclose on divorce to avoid them being taken into account and ultimately falling into the pot to be shared. It can come in many forms, offshore accounts, undervalued businesses, property transferred into another name, friends or family “holding onto” money or assets pending resolution. It is fundamentally unfair and flies in the face of putting your cards on the table.
There may be a perfectly good reason why assets should not be brought into account but those are arguments to make, not a good reason to withhold information.
Failing to disclose assets will guarantee increased costs and tensions. It is quite possible that a forensic accountant will be needed. Time spent in poring over reams of documents will inevitably mean that there will be less money for you both to build your separate futures. It is treated very seriously and the court has power to impose penalties if one party is deemed to have deliberately withheld relevant financial information. This can include a “setting aside” the order or a costs order being made against the defaulting party.
In Emmerdale, the parties are attending mediation so how does that work where there is incomplete disclosure?
Mediation is a voluntary process and it is made clear at the outset that both parties enter the arrangement on the basis that they will disclose all relevant information so that any discussions/negotiations happen in full possession of all the fact. So in short, where parties engage mediation in the hope that they can gain an advantage by not giving full disclosure, it just won’t work.
I am a fan of mediation supported by lawyers as a way of resolving financial matters between couples in a way that preserves some autonomy over the choices made. Court proceedings are costly both financially and emotionally. However sometimes if we, despite our best efforts, just can’t get all the information by voluntary questions to be able to reach a fair outcome, there is simply no alternative but to request the court to assist in getting the information we need.
Sadly for Jai in Emmerdale, I am informed that he is sharing the secret of his stash with Caleb who apparently would sell his granny and ask for change. The secret won’t be secret for much longer.
I wonder if Laurel has already got a solicitor….?
If you would like to discuss any of the points raised in this article, please contact Carmelita Ardren at email carmelita.ardren@raworths.co.uk or call 01423 566 666
Carmelita is the Head of Family Law at Raworths based on Harrogate, North Yorkshire. Carmelita is an Accredited Resolution Family Specialist as well as a member of the Advanced Family Law Society Panel.
Published on 27 August 2024
Dec 24
Rapid changes are underway in the world of work due to the increased use of increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI) products that are available to employees and contractors. As with...
Dec 24
As a director of a limited company, you can trade with the privilege of limited liability. As a result, you also have to be mindful of the many duties you...
