WRIGHT –v- WRIGHT - A landmark divorce ruling on Spousal Maintenance
From time to time there are judgments that are given in the higher courts which establish new laws and set new precedents. These cases of monumental importance and consequence are regarded as landmark cases. The judgment of the Court of Appeal in the recent case of ‘Wright and Wright’ clearly falls within this category. It is a case which could change the landscape for divorce in England and Wales for good.
Tracey Wright and Ian Wright separated in 2008 after an 11 year marriage. They had two children. Mr Wright is a wealthy race horse surgeon and is approaching retirement age. Mrs Wright was a former riding instructor and legal secretary who chose not to work after the divorce.
In the divorce proceedings a financial remedy order was made which left Mrs Wright with a mortgage-free house, including stables for her horse and her two daughters ponies, and £75,000 per annum maintenance consisting of £33,200 per annum maintenance for herself and £41,800 maintenance for the two children.
In 2014 Mr Wright applied to the Family Courts for the maintenance to Mrs Wright to be reduced. He argued it was not fair to be expected to support his former wife indefinitely after his retirement whilst she made no effort to find work. Judge Lynn Roberts agreed. She was very critical of Mrs Wright making no attempt to seek work or update her skills on the basis that she would be supported for life. The Judge stated that it was essential that she “starts to work now.” She ordered that the maintenance for the wife should cease with a gradual tailing off over a period of 5 years. Mrs Wright appealed the decision.
The Court of Appeal held in favour of Mr Wright. Lord Justice Pitchford told Mrs Wright to ‘get a job.’ He said it was imperative that she went out to work and support herself now that the children were aged over 7 years. The Judge stated that the order was never intended to provide the wife with an income for life and the time had come to recognise that at the time of his retirement, Mr Wright should not be paying spousal maintenance.
The ruling is expected to be replicated by the Family Courts throughout England and Wales and divorced women can no longer expect their spousal maintenance to last forever or even until the children reach adulthood. The Court of Appeal has sent a clear message that once the children turn 7 years of age there is an expectation that the primary carer will start work.
This “game changing decision” by the Court of Appeal will mean not only that spousal maintenance is more likely now to cease on a former husband’s retirement but also that more divorced women will be obliged to support themselves once the children turn the age of 7 years. Many husbands will no doubt breathe a sigh of relief after this ruling in the belief that spousal maintenance will no longer be regarded as a ‘meal ticket for life.’
Should you require family law advice please contact Wendy Campbell, head of our Family Law team on 0113 320 5000 or email family@winstonsolicitors.co.uk.
