TRNS v TRNK [2023] EWFC 13310 August 2023
Published: 20/11/2023 11:24
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2023/133.html
Cohen J. W not held to PNA due to material non-disclosure by H in not updating disclosure which he knew/believed to be out of date.
The parties cohabitated from 1999 and married in 2002. Amid their first separation in April/May 2019 they negotiated a PNA which included a disclosure process; in November 2019 there was a reconciliation. They separated permanently in September 2021.
The parties had created multiple joint and separate ventures during the marriage. W argued she should not be held to the PNA due to non-disclosure, mainly surrounding H’s separate venture, MT. H applied for a notice to show cause as to why the PNA should not be made into an order. He argued that because W had the opportunity to make further enquiries during the disclosure process there was no material non-disclosure.
Held: Disclosure must be ‘sufficiently accurate that it gave the receiving spouse sufficient information to make an informed judgment of the value of the family assets’; [38]. H was also under an obligation to update the information he had given if there was a material change in value; [93]. There was a continuing duty of disclosure. Here, there was no full and frank disclosure about the true value of MT. H did mislead by relying on properly drawn up accounts from March 2019, but he had knowledge that the value of MT was likely to be significantly greater when the PNA was drawn up. H also only quoted the price he paid for shares in HL in 2017 and not their increased value – the difference between £935k and £14.5 million.
©2023 Class Legal classlegal.com
