The High Court has directed that a jointly owned family home in Roscommon be transferred to the wife in divorce proceedings, after she pays her husband €40,800 for his interest. The payment is due within eight weeks of the court’s 8 July 2024 judgment.
The ruling followed an appeal by the husband against a Circuit Family Court decision on proper provision. The High Court found the parties were entitled to a divorce decree, subject to proper provision, and addressed the financial arrangements. It made no order for ongoing periodic child maintenance: the wife is to meet the children’s outgoings during their dependency.
The court valued the home at €320,000, taking the midpoint of written valuations of €350,000 and €290,000. After deducting a €66,000 mortgage and an allowance of €10,000 for likely works and legal expenses, it assessed equity at €244,000. It divided that equity 45/55, giving the husband €109,800 and the wife €134,200 before adjustments. The court deducted €34,000 in undisputed child-maintenance arrears from the husband’s share and set a further €50,000 lump sum for future child maintenance. It then included €45,000—half of the approximately €90,000 personal-injury award still available to the wife—in the asset pool and allocated one third of that amount, €15,000, to the husband. These calculations produced the €40,800 buyout.
The judge said the wife’s personal-injury award had not been disclosed in her earlier affidavits of means, and that she had told the Circuit Family Court the funds were fully spent, which was untrue. Full disclosure came during the appeal. The court said that delay had to be reflected in proper provision. It also found the husband’s disclosure deficient concerning a Permanent TSB account funded from joint savings. The order gives him legal and beneficial entitlement to any funds in that account; the account number is redacted in the judgment.
The court directed that the jointly funded education policy, valued at between €2,500 and €3,000, be encashed and paid to the wife. She must pay one quarter to the eldest child immediately and one quarter to each of the other three children on their 18th birthdays. The parties’ pensions are to be equalised to the date of the Circuit Family Court order, 14 October 2021. There was no order for costs.
The judgment records that three children remain dependent and that there had been no contact with their father since 2017. The judge described failures by both parents and said the evidence did not permit definitive findings about the historical relationship issues. No contact arrangements were sought on appeal, and the court made no orders on them. It said the father should receive regular updates about the children, but left liberty to apply to the Circuit Family Court if welfare issues arise during their minority.