The High Court has granted a divorce to G.R. and N.R. and ordered a series of financial and property arrangements, including a €800,000 payment from a family trust to G.R. and the transfer of the family home to her.
In a judgment dated 6 November 2015, Ms Justice Bronagh O’Hanlon found that the court could vary the N.R. Trust under section 14(1)(c) of the Family Law (Divorce) Act 1996. She directed the trustees to appoint €800,000 to G.R. The judge said the variation should go no further than necessary and that the balance of the trust would remain intact. G.R. would cease to be a trust beneficiary on implementation of the judgment and receipt of the payment.
The court ordered the family home, identified in the judgment only as “K” in Co. Dublin, transferred to G.R. for her sole use and benefit, with an exclusive right of residence for life. N.R. was ordered to transfer his legal interest in the Canadian property to her. If he did not sign the necessary documents within 21 days of being asked, the court dispensed with his consent.
N.R. was ordered to transfer to G.R. his legal and beneficial interest in the properties housing the retail business, along with his shareholding in R. Ltd. The judgment also directed periodic maintenance of €1,200 a week for at least six years: €600 for G.R. and €300 each for two of the children, H and N. It noted interim maintenance arrears of €19,200 and directed that a P.T.S.B. account be G.R.’s sole property.
The court’s decisions followed evidence about the parties’ finances, their contributions to family life and the trust’s terms. The judge accepted expert evidence that G.R. was a potential beneficiary only while she remained N.R.’s spouse. She said the family home would provide accommodation for G.R. and children still in education, and that the trust payment would help secure provision for them. The court also found that N.R. had used most of funds inherited by the children from their grandmother, though it said the precise amount could not be quantified.
The judgment recorded a proposal, agreed between G.R. and the children but opposed by N.R., for each parent to acknowledge a €55,000 liability to each of the four children and secure it against their respective interests. It described those arrangements as subject to the court; the operative orders in the judgment do not expressly set out the proposed securities.
The court said it would hear the parties on tax-efficient implementation and on the steps needed to give effect to its rulings, particularly concerning the trust. It made no orders about future custody arrangements, given the children’s ages and circumstances.