Q&As

Is it possible to vary a Mesher order by consent where the non-occupying party has agreed to an extension of the timescale for a transfer to take place in exchange for a further percentage of the net equity?

read titleRead full title
Produced in partnership with Chris Bryden of 4 King’s Bench Walk
Published on LexisPSL on 29/05/2019

The following Family Q&A produced in partnership with Chris Bryden of 4 King’s Bench Walk provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Is it possible to vary a Mesher order by consent where the non-occupying party has agreed to an extension of the timescale for a transfer to take place in exchange for a further percentage of the net equity?

Is it possible to vary a Mesher order by consent where the non-occupying party has agreed to an extension of the timescale for a transfer to take place in exchange for a further percentage of the net equity?

It is not uncommon that, following on from an order in financial remedy proceedings, whether by consent or imposed by the court, the parties will between them agree to a different outcome. Circumstances can change, or the parties might decide that a better deal can be struck than that imposed by the courts or agreed on the day. While an order of the court takes effect upon its making, and is effective unless and until it is discharged or varied, such agreements, if made freely and absent any duress, undue influence or fraud, have a good chance of being upheld by the court in the event that one party subsequently seeks to enforce the terms of the original order. It is however always prudent for the parties to formalise any agreed variation to avoid unnecessary litigation and cost as well as the risk that always applies to any application to the court, but regard should also be had to the courts’ power to vary the type of order in question.

The court has the power upon an application to the court under section 31 of the Matrimonial Causes

Related documents:

Popular documents