The High Court has ordered a respondent in judicial separation and divorce proceedings to transfer €125,000 from a New Zealand bank account to the applicant and pay a further €265,000 within nine months. The respondent may instead transfer a Las Vegas property valued at $375,000 in place of that payment.
Mr Justice Binchy made the financial orders in a judgment delivered on 18 January 2019. The applicant had sought decrees of judicial separation and divorce, along with related relief. The judgment describes the court hearing as taking place on 6 November 2018. It does not state in the supplied text whether the decrees themselves were granted.
The parties have three children, then aged 19, 17 and 15, who were living with them in rented accommodation in Ireland. Their custody and access arrangements were not disputed. The court said the children needed a stable home while completing their education and expected them to remain dependent until about age 23.
The main financial dispute concerned four investment properties in Las Vegas and savings in New Zealand. The respondent said those assets were hers, arguing that she had brought substantial assets into the marriage and that the parties had agreed the properties would belong to her. The applicant claimed beneficial ownership, saying he understood the parties’ assets to be shared and that the properties had been put in the respondent’s sole name for tax reasons.
The judge did not decide which account of the marriage contract was correct. He said the court had to make adequate and reasonable provision for the spouses and dependent children before considering whether a prenuptial agreement should be enforced. He also noted that the marriage certificate did not record a choice of contract and that no evidence of the applicable law in the overseas country or EU member state had been presented.
The court said the family’s resources could not support buying two family-sized homes in Dublin. It considered the applicant’s employment income and need for a home for himself and the children, the respondent’s present inability to work and need for accommodation and income, and her greater contribution to accumulated assets. The applicant was made responsible for the children’s ongoing maintenance, with implementation during any periods they stayed with the respondent to be discussed with the parties.
The court did not direct the sale of a particular Las Vegas property. Instead, it ordered the respondent to pay €265,000 within nine months, or transfer the property at 152 Cliff Valley Drive, Las Vegas, valued at $375,000 as of 11 July 2018. The judgment also ordered payment of the equivalent of €125,000 from the New Zealand account. The supplied judgment pages do not set out whether decrees of separation or divorce were ultimately made.