Subscriber OnlyCourts

Woman can buy out ex-husband’s interest in €320,000 family home for €40,800, judge rules

Order made in High Court divorce case reflects man’s non-payment of child maintenance

A High Court judge made orders entitling the woman to buy out her ex-husband's interest in the family home
A High Court judge made orders entitling the woman to buy out her ex-husband's interest in the family home

A judge has made orders entitling a woman to buy out her ex-husband’s interest in their family home for €40,800 as part of proper provision in a divorce case.

The house has an estimated value of €320,000 and a remaining mortgage of €66,000.

The man appealed to the High Court seeking a divorce and proper provision after claiming the Circuit Court did not make proper provision in the woman’s judicial separation proceedings.

In a recently published judgment Ms Justice Nuala Jackson noted the parties’ long marriage broke up several years ago and three of their children are dependent and in secondary school.

READ MORE

The woman previously obtained a protection and a barring order, both of which were complied with by the man, she said.

It was of “considerable concern” that orders for child maintenance and access were not complied with.

A “sad aspect” was that the relationship between the children and their father has entirely broken down with no contact for a considerable period and no access for five years, she noted.

The parties were “very much at odds” about the reasons for that and it was “most unfortunate” expert assessments were not sought, or court applications made, in that regard.

Promoting a relationship with his children did not appear to be the man’s priority and his failure to comply with maintenance orders was likewise “unimpressive”, she said. He remains a guardian of his children and should be kept updated about them, she said.

On the evidence, including the parties living apart for some eight years, the judge found in favour of a decree of divorce subject to proper provision.

Both parties, she noted, have been in full-time permanent employment for years with the man having a somewhat higher income. The family home is in their joint names, both contributed equally to its purchase and mortgage repayments, the woman lives there with the children and the man is in rented accommodation.

She calculated total equity in the family home at €244,000. Because the children will remain with their mother, that was split 45/55 per cent, €109,800 for him and €134,200 for her.

Saying it was “inexplicable” the man had not paid “modest” total maintenance of €100 weekly as ordered in 2017, for then four dependent children, she deducted €34,000 for unpaid maintenance, plus a €50,000 lump sum to cover future maintenance, from his share, reducing the buyout sum to €25,800.

That was then increased to €40,800 after the judge ruled the man was entitled to €15,000 from a €100,000 personal injuries award made to the woman sometime after she issued judicial separation proceedings in 2017.

The woman had not disclosed the award funds in her affidavit of means to the Circuit Court but the fact and amount of the award emerged in that court and the woman gave untruthful information those funds had been fully spent, the judge said.

In sworn statements for the High Court appeal, the woman said some of the award funds remained.

That delay in making full and accurate disclosure must be reflected in orders for proper provision, the judge said.

The man had also made deficient disclosure concerning a savings account in his sole name comprising funds accumulated from joint funds of the parties, she said. He had said there was €65,000 in that account about a year before the parties separated and all of that was spent.

Given the overall conduct of the litigation, and the woman’s delayed disclosure, the judge directed the man is entitled to any funds still in that account.

Both parties appear to have modest pensions and the value of the man’s is greater, she said. Proper provision requires pension equalisation to the date of the Circuit Court orders, she directed.

Mary Carolan

Mary Carolan

Mary Carolan is the Legal Affairs Correspondent of the Irish Times