CLOSE SEARCH
We acted on behalf of a Husband, who was going through a divorce with his Wife and seeking to resolve their financial matters amicably. Divorce proceedings had been issued, and the parties were within the 20-week reflection period, during which they aimed to reach an agreement capable of being formalised into a Consent Order for court approval.
We assisted the Husband in negotiating with his Wife after exchange of Forms E.
We advised the Husband that the court would apply the principles set out in section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1975 when determining a fair outcome.
Several factors were especially relevant to this case:
A long marriage of 20 years - a long marriage typically leads to a starting point of equal division of marital assets, subject to needs.
Ages - both parties were in their mid-late forties Both parties had strong remaining earning capacity but were approaching a stage where retirement planning becomes increasingly important.
Children – ages 16 and 18. One child was legally an adult but the parties accepted that he would be financially dependent while attending university. The younger child remained dependent and was expected to pursue higher education.
Wife’s reduced earning capacity - the Wife had paused her career to care for the children during their early years. She was self-employed at the time of negotiations with a modest income and the younger child lived with her full-time.
Defined benefit pension accrued throughout marriage - the Husband had a substantial pension compared to the Wife’s modest fund. Equalisation of retirement income was likely to be required, and actuarial input was recommended.
Clean break desirable - a clean break was desirable to Husband to limit the future obligations of the parties.
An early settlement offer was advanced to Wife. We proposed:
The family home is placed on the open market for sale - The needs of both parties moving forward meant that the family home likely needed to be sold to release equity.
A proportion of the proceeds of sale of the family home be used to buy a new property for the Wife and children. The remaining net proceeds be divided equally.
Deferred sale of the new property - The property would be sold once the youngest child turns 18, or upon other agreed trigger events.
No pension sharing order - the Husband sought to retain his pension and instead meet the Wife’s needs through capital.
Child maintenance - the Husband proposed to come to an informal arrangement to support the children directly.
Immediate clean break - structured to limit ongoing exposure and prevent future claims.
Our negotiation strategy balanced fairness, needs, and long-term security while avoiding unnecessary conflict:
Framed fairness around needs, not strict equality - we emphasised that the needs of the parties were the court’s primary concern, allowing the Husband to present his offer as principled rather than concessional.
Positioned sale of the family home as the only viable option - neither party could afford to retain it. The sale released the equity needed for both parties to rehouse.
Used pension disparity as a bargaining tool without conceding a pension share - we acknowledged the Wife’s claim but demonstrated that her needs could be met through capital instead, allowing the Husband to preserve his pension.
Highlighted the practicality of informal child maintenance - given the children’s ages, informal support was flexible and proportionate.
Leveraged the Husband’s willingness to offer a future capital release - a deferred sale structure balanced the Wife’s short-term need for stability with the Husband’s need for eventual capital return.
Presented the clean break as mutually protective - finality benefited both parties and financial arrangements.
Although the Wife initially rejected the Husband’s early proposal, the structure and reasoning behind that offer ultimately shaped the final agreement. Through careful guidance, strategic negotiation, and a clear focus on the section 25 factors, we were able to steer the parties toward a settlement that balanced needs, fairness, and long-term security.
Sale deferred until the youngest child completed education or turned 18 - ensured stability for the children during critical educational years.
Sale of the family home = released the equity required to rehouse both parties. Husband offered distribution of net equity 55/45 in Wife’s favour. This would enable Wife’s housing need to be met, with a small reserve to provide financial security.
Full capital and spousal maintenance clean break - both parties achieved finality and protection from future claims.
Pension offset - an expert was instructed to calculate what would be an appropriate pension sharing order and calculate an off-set figure which was preferred by Husband. The parties agreed a capital lump sum to Wife which off-set her interest in Husband’s pension.
Informal child maintenance arrangements - given the children’s ages and the Husband’s willingness to contribute directly, informal support was appropriate and flexible.
Get in touch
If you would like to speak with a member of the team you can contact us on:
