M.D. v E.H.D.

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr Justice Michael White
• Judgment Date: 20 April 2012
• Neutral Citation: [2012] IEHC 580
• Docket Number: [No.134 CAF/2011]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 20 April 2012

D (M) v D (EH)

CIRCUIT APPEAL

CIRCUIT COURT RECORD NO. 6191F AND 1013F

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT TO THE HIGH COURT BEFORE THE HON MR JUSTICE KEVIN O'HIGGINS, JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT AT THE COURTHOUSE, ENNIS, CO. CLARE ON THE 8 TH MARCH, 2007

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL SEPARATION AND FAMILY LAW REFORM ACT 1989

AND IN THE MATTER OF THE FAMILY LAW ACT 1995

BETWEEN

M.D.

APPLICANT

AND

E. H. D.

RESPONDENT

[2012] IEHC 580

[No.134 CAF/2011]

THE HIGH COURT

Family – Separation – Ancillary relief – Application for enforcement of orders made at first instance

Facts: The appellant and respondent had been judicially separated in 2007 due to irreconcilable differences. The respondent sought to enforce a number of ancillary relief orders made at first instance, whilst the appellant sought review of the orders made.

Held by White J following consideration of s 18 of the Family Law Act 1995 as well as the available case law from the Supreme Court, that as the order made was a lump sum payment order and not an instalment order, the order could not be reviewed. DT v CT (Divorce: Ample resources) [2002] 3 IR 334 followed.

In respect of the respondent”s appeal, the Court was reluctant to modify the amount granted notwithstanding the strong grounds advanced for doing so due to the appellant being out of work and accruing tax liabilities. The sum ordered by the Court would be affirmed, and both appeals would be dismissed.

Commenting generally on the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the matter, White J suggested the proper forum for application of this sort was the court of first instance, namely the Circuit Court.

FAMILY LAW ACT 1995 S8(1)(C)(i)

FAMILY LAW ACT 1995 S18

FAMILY LAW ACT 1995 S18(1)(D)

T (D) v T (C) 2002 3 IR 334

FAMILY LAW (DIVORCE) ACT 1996 S22

RSC O.61

RSC O.61 r20

Mr Justice Michael White

1 The High Court on appeal from the Circuit Family Court by order of the 8^th of March 2007, affirmed a decree of judicial separation and ancillary orders.

2 The respondent has applied by notice of motion of the 7^th December, 2011, seeking enforcement of certain provisions of the order.

3 The appellant who was the respondent in the original proceedings has issued a motion dated the 11^th January, 2012, seeking to review portions of the order. The part of the order which he wishes to have reviewed is para. 5 which states:

"Make a financial adjustment order in favour of the respondent directing the appellant to pay the sum of €75,000 to the respondent within a period of 9 months of this date".

4 There is no such order as a financial adjustment order pursuant to the provisions of the Family Law Act1995.

5 The order made by the learned judge was an order pursuant to s. 8(1)(c)(i) that is:

"An order that either of the spouses shall make to the other spouse a lump sum...