Reviewing a Financial Settlement After Divorce

Pros

Can help in Cases of Unfair Settlement

Reviewing a financial settlement after divorce can help unravel whether any of the parties did not get a fair settlement from the divorce. Determining what constitutes a fair divorce settlement depends on a number of income/wealth-related factors which can be complicated at times. This is just one of the several reasons you need an expert law firm such as Austin Kemp.

Serves as Deterrent

A financial settlement review can deter a spouse who is contemplating cheating on the other party by hiding money or withholding information on matrimonial assets or other forms of cheating. The logic here is that the realization of the possibility of future legal action (and its likely consequences) after the original settlement can discourage a potential divorce financial settlement cheat.

Ensures that children’s Welfare is Not Compromised

Children’s welfare is a very important consideration when courts decide on divorce financial settlements in the UK. Reviewing a financial settlement after divorce is another opportunity of ensuring that assets have been shared in a way that guarantees the children’s future maintenance.

Serves as a Reference for Similar Cases

Divorce financial settlement review cases are not everyday occurrences. The law profession relies on legal precedents in the form of previous similar cases and judgments as references for ongoing litigations. A good example is the above-mentioned Barder vs Barder case in 1987 which is widely acknowledged as the genesis and major reference when it comes to reviewing financial settlements after divorce.

Increases People’s Belief in the Judiciary

For a divorce party that feels aggrieved after the first financial settlement, the opportunity of a review will not only be extremely heartwarming and reassuring but is capable of increasing his or her belief in the judicial system, especially if the case turns out favourable.

As noted earlier, the Barder vs Barder case in 1987 set out some conditions that can necessitate a review of a financial settlement after divorce. Here are the conditions to look out for based on Barder vs Barder:

No Full and Frank Financial Disclosure

New evidence may emerge indicating that there was no full and frank financial disclosure by one party as of when the original financial settlement was made. In such circumstances, the court is empowered to vary or even set the old settlement order aside. However, the undisclosed assets must be substantial or the information that was not disclosed in the earlier judgment must be vital enough to influence the settlement.

Note that a party can be accused of non-disclosure if he or she purchases a house after separation but does not include it as a matrimonial asset before the divorce is finalised.

Undue Influence

If it is later discovered that one party unduly influenced the other (such as through threats, harassment, etc) to accept the terms of the original financial settlement, then the court has the right to review the original settlement with respect to varying its terms or completely setting the order aside.