A man may buy out his estranged wife’s interest in the family home for €70,000, which is about 60 per cent of the value of the property net of mortgage, a High Court judge has ruled.
The man, who has a new partner, lives in rented accommodation with one of the couple’s adult children. The woman lives mainly with her new partner while a relative of his and another person live in the home where she had lived with her husband and children.
In a recently published judgment on divorce proceedings, Ms Justice Nuala Jackson granted a decree of divorce and made the family home a €70,000 transfer order as part of proper provision.
While the woman’s position appeared “somewhat less secure” than the man’s, this was appropriately dealt with by allocating to her the “significantly greater” share in the family home, the judge said.
Almost 60,000 without power as Met Éireann warns cold spell will continue until Friday
‘My friend was sleeping with another friend’s boyfriend and refuses to take responsibility’
‘I actually felt unsafe as an English person in the Aviva’
I loved Alice Munro but recent revelations have tainted her legacy forever
The parties had had “a long journey of travel together” during their marriage of some 20 years and both had made their contribution along the way, she said. The woman was probably engaged in the care of the children and home-related care activities over the years but also completed courses of study and earned income on occasions. The man was the primary earner for the family.
Both parties received social welfare payments linked to disability and had earned income, she said.
The agreed value of the family home was €232,500, the judge said. Having deducted mortgage costs, she calculated the equity in the family home at about €116,647.
The judge said she considered a sale of the house was appropriate. The “substantial” issue for the court to decide was whether the man, who was paying the mortgage, should be given an option to purchase it. Because the youngest child lived with him, the judge decided he should.
In deciding the value of the woman’s interest in the property, the judge had regard to the fact there was some, although “not extreme”, disparity of income between the parties.
The man had said he had family assistance available to him concerning purchasing the woman’s interest in the family home property, he was a tradesman and it was possible he had some degree of additional income, the judge said. He had disclosed a Revolut account “very late” in the day and at the court’s direction, she noted.
Her view was that there was not any “significant” undisclosed income.
The judge also found the woman was in a position to supplement her social welfare with additional income from an area of work in which she had experience. The woman’s evidence that she was not continuing such work was “far from compelling” and it seemed she had other sources of income, the judge said.
Taking the various factors into account, the judge concluded the man should be entitled to buy out the woman’s interest in the family home for €70,000, about 60 per cent of the value of the property net of mortgage. The court, she said, would make an order transferring the property to him on payment of that sum within a specified time and he would continue to be responsible for mortgage payments.
If he chose not to buy the property, and it was sold on the market, the woman should get two-thirds, and the man one-third, of the net proceeds of sale, she directed.
For reasons including that none of the children remained dependent, the parties’ income status and their “poor relationship”, the judge said it was not appropriate to make maintenance payment orders.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
