In the recent case of Vaughan the Court of Appeal have clarified the approach to be adopted when considering the continuing claims of one party against an ex-partner who has remarried.   

 In the Vaughan case at the time of appeal Mrs Vaughan was 66 and Mr Vaughan was 71 years of age.  In 1985 Mr Vaughan had remarried and his second wife was 15 years younger than him.  The issue arose because Mr Vaughan’s income reduced as a result of poor health and he therefore exercised his rights under his pension scheme to have an annuity paid to himself and his second wife during their joint lives and upon death at the same rate to the survivor (approximately £100,000.00 gross per annum).  The Court of Appeal were asked to consider the lower Courts decision to discharge the maintenance order made in Mrs Vaughan’s favour back in 1989 in the sum of £15,175.00.  The Court of Appeal felt that the decision of the lower Court was unduly harsh to Mrs Vaughan and allowed the appeal but rather than requiring Mr Vaughan to continue with maintenance payments the Court of Appeal instead ordered an additional capital sum of £215,000.00 to be paid to replace those maintenance payments.

The Court of Appeal gave guidance that when faced with the competing needs of the first and the second families the Court must strike a balance between the obligations arising from the first family and the perfectly reasonable and not unusual wish to embark on new relationships.   The obligations to a second wife cannot be given priority over the claims to the first wife and the Court will not for example adjust the award by assuming that the second wife has a 50% claim on all assets and income.

The latest available statistics reveal that in 2008 37% of marriages involved couples where at least one of the partners had a previous marriage.    The Vaughan case emphasises once again the need wherever possible to secure a full financial clean break when the first marriage is dissolved.