Husband Loses Supreme Court Case for Fraudulent Financial Dislosure

In the case of Sharland v Sharland the marriage had broken down and the parties were going through divorce proceedings. 

The husband owned a large proportion of the shares in a software company. In 2012, the wife agreed to accept 30% of the net proceeds of sale of the shares, plus some other asstes. However, the husband failed to disclose the fact that the company was about to be floated, meaning it was actually worth far more than the amount he had upt forward to the court at the final hearing.

The judge stated that the husband had deliberately and dishonestly concealed this information and said that if the court had known of the arrangements, the proceedings would have been adjourned.

The wife appealed and attempted to have the consent order set aside. This was refused by the Court of Appeal, but the Supreme Court has overturned this decision and the wife is to be allowed to appeal.

The Supreme Court said that ''fraud unravels all’’. Parties have a duty to provide full financial disclosure in financial remedy proceedings and the Court has demonstrated that those who fail to do so, will not prevail.

Contact us for a free discussion if the court has made a decision which you want to appeal. 

Callback Request Form