Final Hearing - Yesterday

An update:

My partner and his stbx had the Final Hearing yesterday.

The final result was as expected, she received 50% of both of his Pensions.

From what I have been told to expect, I do have some criticisms of the court procedure on the day though.

Firstly, it appeared that the lady judge had a pre-conceived idea and what was going to be the end result whatever she had been told and appeared uninterested in any evidence that was presented by my partner.

My partner was told by the judge not to discuss any open offers that had been made previously – that one sticks as the stbx had not submitted any open offers throughout the whole process.

Costs were not discussed at all – the court was dismissed after the Judges summing up.

The conduct of the stbx in relation to Practice Directions that had not been followed at all – Form E submitted 3 weeks late, Questionnaire, Chronology & Issues 2 weeks late, Open Position Statement 4 weeks late.

The Final Hearing only lasted 90 minutes and whilst it was not the result my partner had hoped for, he realised what it was likely to be.

The frustration is at the Judge – evidence not listened to, Practice Directions not adhered too and costs not discussed.

Lastly, the whole thing is not over yet. The Decree Absolute was not granted. Apparently until the Pension Provider approves the Order made by the Court, the Decree Absolute cannot be made.

We are nearly there – but not quite.

Good luck to everybody else with a Final Hearing.

NN

When a judge lists a FH for 90 minutes its a strong indication that the judge thinks its straight forward and there is little to argue about.

With a hearing this short there is little time for statements and examination.

Judges almost always have an idea where the settlement should fall, its what they do, so after reading arguments from both and from E`s the judge will have some idea of where it will end.

Its all over bar the shouting so take heart the end is nigh.

Yes, it is nearly over thankfully.

The FH was listed for half a day and very different fro the Judge at FDR.

That's the problem, 2 different judges, with two different views.

Oh well !

The rule is that you can`t have the same judge for FH as FDR they must be different, that said it does not always happen either.

The judge for FH will have had much more time to read before the hearing than the one at FDR so although the outcome should be about the same it can vary.

Thanks for the replies.

As costs were not discussed at the Final Hearing, can I assume that the STBX can not now claim them ? She was on legl aid, my partner was LIP.

Also, I am aware that some CETVs are up in the air again. As we now have to wait for the P1 to be produced by the STBX sol, will the CETV changes impact on the speed that the pension sharing order will be implemented ?

Hoping that this will be sorted by Christmas or am I hoping too much ?

As ever, many thanks.

I wonder if anybody can help with Costs please ?

My partner had his Final Hearing in Nov 11 – posts above give details.

My partner has always been a Litigant in Person, however, did also use a Solicitor for legal advice but always self-repped in Court and handled all paperwork – Solicitor was never “on the record”.

STBX was firstly a privately funded case, then half way through the Ancillary Relief proceedings changed to Legal Aid.

Although the Court Order was agreed in principle at the Final Hearing, the Court Order could not be finalised as there were 2 Pension Sharing Orders awarded to the STBX that had to be approved by the Pension Provider (Army).

These have now been approved by the Pension Provider and the case has been re-listed at Court on 23 Jan 12 for approval of the Court Order.
The Costs were not discussed at the Final Hearing.

I was sent a Draft Court Order from the STBX’s Solicitor on 7 Dec 11. As well as mentioning the Pension Sharing Orders and the normal “any further claims dismissed under the MCA 1973 and / or no further claims on the death of either party”, there is also this:

“There be no order for costs save for detailed assessment of the Applicant wife’s (STBX) publicly funded costs.”

I thought that each party paid their own costs for Ancillary Relief as per the Practice Directions ?

Additionally, at the Final Hearing the STBX’s Solicitor did not complete the Form H1 (Final Hearing Costs Form) either.

My partner ensured that during the whole Ancillary Relief proceedings, he fully complied with all Practice and Court Directions. He was never late with any forms or information and fully complied.

Can he really now be expected to have to pay her costs even though from the Pension Sharing Order the STBX will immediately receive a monthly pension payment due to her age.

Please can anybody help ?

There is no order for costs, there be no order for costs save a detailed assessment means you each pay your own costs.