How refreshing to see that amidst all the sensationalist headlines and hyperbole there's also some sensible commentary coming out of today's Supreme Court judgment. Dr Alexandra Gooden is one of a number of lawyers who point out that this ruling will apply any financially weaker spouse (male as well as female) who negotiates a settlement on the basis of one set of financial facts only to discover that a much greater 'pot' was in fact available. This seems to me to be a hugely sensible judgement for those divorcing spouses who are wrongfully deceived into agreeing settlements. It cannot be right that having discovered dishonest financial disclosure, or lack of it, the deceived ex-spouse just has to sit back and 'suck it up'.

{The UK's highest court paved the way for divorce settlements to be renegotiated Even after a divorce is settled, this ruling means that former spouses who are able to prove their ex-partner deliberately obscured their full financial position could seek an appeal, with their divorce settlements re-examined and potentially renegotiated. The husbands in the high-profile cases of Sharland and Gohil, had both lied to the court about the true value of their wealth. Today, their former spouses were given leave to have their cases reheard, paving the way for divorce settlements to be re-examined and potentially renegotiated if one party has failed to provide full and frank disclosure of their assets. This judgment is a warning shot across the bows of those tempted to under disclose as to the potential consequences. www.cityam.com/226550/what-todays- . . .

divorce