End of Joint Lives Maintenance Orders?

On the breakdown of a marriage the Court not only has to consider the division of the parties’ capital and pension provision but also their income needs and whether a spousal maintenance order is appropriate.

The recent case of Wright –v- Wright [2015] has attracted much media attention and it has been suggested that this case signals the end of joint lives maintenance orders and that women should be prepared to return to work rather than relying on their ex-husband’s for financial support.

In Wright the original maintenance order was made in 2008 when the Husband was 52 and the Wife 44.  The order for maintenance was made on a joint lives basis as the Wife had not worked for 9 years and the parties children were aged 3 and 9.  The trial judge made it clear to the Wife at the time that she would be expected to begin working in 2 years of the order (albeit around her childcare commitments) in order to contribute financially to her household.

The Husband applied in 2012 to reduce the spousal maintenance payments due to his approaching retirement, a decline in his income and the maintenance payments being increased due to RPI increases.  In the intervening period, the Wife had done nothing about returning to work or updating her skills to enable her to do so.

Whilst the judge dealing with the downward variation did not believe it appropriate to cease payments immediately, the Judge did believe it appropriate to vary the maintenance downwards over a period of 5 years until 2019 when it would terminate in order to enable the Wife to improve her earning capacity.  In reaching this decision the Judge referred to the expectations of the original trial judge that the Wife would be expected to seek work around her child care commitments and contribute financially and rejected the Wife’s explanation for her inactivity. The judge also concluded that the Husband should no longer be paying spousal maintenance by his retirement.

The Judge, however, did leave open the possibility of the Wife extending this term or varying the level of maintenance before 2019.  The Court of Appeal refused the Wife’s application for permission to appeal.

Joint lives maintenance orders will still be appropriate in some cases.  In the recent case of SS –v- NS (Spousal Maintenance)[2014] Mostyn J suggested a formulaic approach to maintenance would be impossible and that it should still be calculated on the basis of need with the preference being for an extendable term rather than joint lives.

It is very difficult to gauge the significance of the decision in Wright because each case is fact specific but inevitably judges will have the decision in this case in mind when considering future applications to vary maintenance.  Certainly, there should no longer be an expectation that the Court will award financial support indefinitely and there is an increasing expectation that women will be expected to return to work post divorce.

For any advice regarding this topic, contact a member of our family team on 0800 387 747.