BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
United Kingdom Supreme Court |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Supreme Court >> Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60 (14 October 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2015/60.html Cite as: [2015] 3 WLR 1070, [2015] WLR(D) 408, [2015] Fam Law 1461, [2015] 3 FCR 481, [2016] AC 871, [2016] 1 All ER 671, [2015] 2 FLR 1367, [2015] UKSC 60 |
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable PDF version] [View ICLR summary: [2015] WLR(D) 408] [Buy ICLR report: [2016] AC 871] [Buy ICLR report: [2015] 3 WLR 1070] [Help]
Michaelmas Term
[2015] UKSC 60
On appeal from: [2014] EWCA Civ 95
Sharland (Appellant) v Sharland (Respondent)
before
Lord Neuberger, President
Lady Hale, Deputy President
Lord Clarke
Lord Wilson
Lord Sumption
Lord Reed
Lord Hodge
JUDGMENT GIVEN ON
Heard on 8, 9 and 10 June 2015
Appellant (Sharland) Martin Pointer QC Peter Mitchell (Instructed by Irwin Mitchell LLP) |
Respondent (Sharland) Nicholas Francis QC Nicholas Allen (Instructed by JMW LLP) |
LADY HALE: (with whom Lord Neuberger, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Hodge agree)
The facts
The decisions of the High Court and Court of Appeal
Settling matrimonial claims
"It is not every failure of frank and full disclosure which would justify a court in setting aside an order of the kind concerned in this appeal. On the contrary, it will only be in cases where the absence of full and frank disclosure has led to the court making, either in contested proceedings or by consent, an order which is substantially different from the order which it would have made if such disclosure had taken place that a case for setting aside can possibly be made good. Parties who apply to set aside orders on the ground of failure to disclose some relatively minor matter or matters, the disclosure of which would not have made any substantial difference to the order which the court would have made or approved, are likely to find their applications being summarily dismissed …."
Analysis
Procedural issues