Securing the Family Home Despite Non-Cooperation

Background

The matter followed the breakdown of a long marriage involving three children. The main asset was the former matrimonial home, held in the husband's sole name and subject to a mortgage with significant arrears. He also owned a second property.

The husband's refusal to engage constructively created a real risk that the home would be repossessed, placing the client and children under considerable housing pressure.

Strategy and outcome

The case required a settlement structure that dealt with ownership, the mortgage arrears and finality between the parties. The former matrimonial home was transferred to the client, who assumed responsibility for the mortgage, while the husband retained his separate property.

Responsibility for the arrears was divided unequally, with the husband required to clear his share within a defined period. The wider settlement dismissed future financial claims and provided a clean break.

• The family home was preserved rather than repossessed
• Property held in one party's name was transferred
• Mortgage arrears were addressed expressly
• The final order provided long-term financial certainty

What this case demonstrates

Non-cooperation does not remove the court's ability to reach a workable financial outcome. Clear evidence about housing needs, liabilities, ownership and the children's circumstances can support a structured resolution even where one party is obstructive.