Civil Litigation | GPM Solicitor https://silkssolicitors.co.uk Trusted Legal Advice in the Black Country Tue, 09 Feb 2021 16:36:50 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 Divorcée wins court battle with ex over rent on marital home https://silkssolicitors.co.uk/2021/02/divorcee-wins-court-battle-with-ex-over-rent-on-marital-home/ Tue, 09 Feb 2021 16:36:48 +0000 https://silkssolicitors.co.uk/?p=2548 A woman who was sued by her ex-husband for £600,000 in back rent after refusing to leave their matrimonial home until it was sold has won her court battle.

Divorce Settlement

Jayne Richardson Derhalli and Kerim Derhalli agreed a “clean break” consent order to divide the family wealth in 2016, leaving Mrs Richardson Derhalli with £6.4 million plus millions more on the sale of their London home, which was in his name.

Sued for Rent

While Mr Derhalli moved out of their home on St Mary’s Place, Kensington in 2014, Mrs Richardson Derhalli remained in residence.

The house was put on the market for £8 million but, perhaps due to the impact of Brexit on the London property market, they struggled to find a buyer for two years.

Mrs Richardson Derhalli continued to live in the house, leading to Mr Derhalli insisting that she should pay him £5,000 per week in rent. However, his ex-wife refused to pay, stating that she was entitled to live in the property rent-free until it was sold. What followed was described by Court of Appeal Judge, Lady Justice King, as a, “cautionary tale” of “personal animosity between them that…drove them…through two appeals.”

Judgements

While a county court judge found that Mrs Richardson Derhalli had been trespassing in the property while she lived there rent-free, this was overturned last year in a High Court ruling; Mr Justice Fancourt found that Mrs Richardson Derhalli was entitled under the terms of their divorce to inhabit the property without paying rent until they were able to sell.

Earlier this month, the Court of Appeal agreed with Mr Justice Fancourt, forcing Mr Derhalli to concede victory to his former wife and face heavy fees from the lawyers involved.

Precedent Set?

According to Lady Justice King, “This case sets no precedent, incorrect or otherwise.” Mrs Derhalli’s lawyer referred to the ruling by stating that, “Common sense has prevailed.” The terms of the financial agreement were in line with the divorcée’s occupation of the house until the sale, and the momentum of the case appears to have been generated more by an acrimonious relationship and the means to fight a very expensive legal battle, than the potential of important case law, as Mr Derhalli had claimed.

Advice

Most people don’t have money to fight court battles, and most people don’t have to. If you need advice on any financial aspect of a divorce, do call us on +441213184707 and we’ll be pleased to offer you a free 30 minute consultation.

]]>