Family - Don't burn your bridges!

A spurned wife’s crime of passion could prove to be an inflammatory issue in her future divorce proceedings.

Deborah Jackson was convicted of arson by Leicester Crown Court. After 18 years of marriage the defendant and her husband, Kurt, had decided to divorce because of his 2-year extra-marital affair. Following a period of reconciliation, they had decided to sell the house and start afresh. The night before contracts were due to exchange, Mrs Jackson found out that her husband was with another woman, and she burnt the house down to prevent her husband from receiving his share of the sale proceeds.

The former matrimonial home had been valued at £210,000 before the fire. After the fire, the property was sold for a mere £95,000.

Although arson is a Criminal offence, and is dealt with through the Criminal Courts, Deborah Jackson may find that her actions come back to haunt her in divorce proceedings in the Family Courts.

The Court has a duty to consider any relevant conduct of a husband and wife when making an order about financial settlement. The conduct must be both ‘gross and obvious’ to be taken into account by the Court. So although the Court would usually overlook a certain amount of unpleasant behaviour between the husband and wife, burning the house down is an extreme activity that is bound to attract the Court’s attention!

Unfortunately for Mrs Jackson, the Court are likely to take a very dim view of her actions when deciding on her share of the marital assets and this could prejudice the outcome of the case for her.

In practice, conduct rarely meets the ‘gross and obvious’ test which would make it ‘inequitable’ for the Court to disregard it. However, in those limited instances where it is relevant, it can make a significant difference to the settlement made in favour of the innocent spouse.
 

If you have any family related issues or would like further information or advice please contact Kim Aucott in our Family Team.