NEED FOR FINAL ORDERS
The woman's solicitor told The Times
that she did not seek an earlier divorce because, at the time, "the
child was very young, and she did not want all the anguish of a messy
divorce". Another reason for seeking a
divorce was that the former husband had come into a considerable
inheritance.
Her lawyers claimed that due to the husband's nominal provision for the
support of their child after they were separated, and his lack of
emotional and financial support during the marriage, the woman had
suffered a considerable financial disadvantage.
The court agreed with the wife's claim that she required a fund to
supply her with long-term security for housing and pension provision.
Although the inheritance had occurred after the separation, it was the
only real asset in the case, and as the wife had a "need" it would
necessarily have to be met from the inherited asset. The court awarded
the woman sufficient to house herself but also left the husband enough
to buy another property.
It was only possible to bring the case because no final orders had been made by the court at the time of their separation 22 years ago.