Talk

Advanced search

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

please translate this legalese

(15 Posts)
TeenageWildlife Tue 21-Jul-15 14:12:08

"To pay the Petitioner for the benefit of the children the sum of £3,000 per annum for each child (that being £6000 in total) for one year. Such sum shall be paid monthly in advance by standing order starting....."

does this really mean only pay it for one year? Why would that be the case? Or does in mean £6000 in one year each year?

Bellemere Tue 21-Jul-15 15:49:58

Yes, for one year only.

FlopIsMyParentingGuru Tue 21-Jul-15 15:54:34

I agree.

FlopIsMyParentingGuru Tue 21-Jul-15 15:55:35

Sorry not clear. I agree it's for one year only. Unless something else in the document contradicts it but it sounds pretty certain.

RedDaisyRed Tue 21-Jul-15 17:12:54

Really really bad drafting because "per annum" means every year and then it scuppers that by saying for one year.
When you have conflicts like that you then turn to the other evidence such as what was said in court, what the emails say, what those involved say which lead to the drafting. that might well give us our answer but if I had to put money on it it probably means just for a year
Does it go on to say what happens after that one year?

Bellemere Tue 21-Jul-15 17:55:07

Is it a child maintenance type thing? Because those court orders only last for a year as far as I am aware. After that, either party can go through the CMS instead.

prh47bridge Tue 21-Jul-15 17:55:26

Is this a consent order? If so, regardless of the wording, either party can go to the CSA/CMEC after one year. Their calculation of child maintenance liability will then replace the figure in the order.

RedDaisyRed Tue 21-Jul-15 18:19:17

Ah yes, our final clean break consent order does not mention one year but it correct that after 12 months whatever the order says either partner can go to the CMS or whatever it's called to change things re payments for children.

TeenageWildlife Tue 21-Jul-15 20:35:09

thanks all - I don't know why per annum and for one year appear like that. This is on The General Form of Order - Ancillary Relief. It was all barely referred to as there was a much larger issue taking up all the time and money (his trust). It is from 10 years ago, and I never received the 6K. A separate issue has now come up and I wondered whether I could raise this and if it was 60K or 6K that was owing.

RedDaisyRed Tue 21-Jul-15 21:48:43

1. Was it for child maintenance or spousal?
2. If for children did either of you apply to the CSA after a year or not?
3. Can you remember how the year came to be written about eg your lawyer might have emailed you at the time something explaining what the £6k was about. I think in most areas of law you have 6 years to bring claims for money owed so if it's 10 years ago you might be barred from claiming due to the Limitation Act 1980 although it may be different under divorce law.
4. Did you have a clean break from him for you as a spouse or did it say you or he paid each other any continuing maintenance in that order, even 1p a year?

TeenageWildlife Tue 21-Jul-15 22:37:25

Iit was for children.
No application to CSA
I don't remember anything being said about this at all, it was such a protracted and expensive divorce, I had to fight to stay in my own house
We had a clean break

RedDaisyRed Wed 22-Jul-15 06:26:07

So if it were for children that indicates it might well be for one year only because after the year either side could have applied to the CSA.
So I wonder what happens if someone has their £6k for one year but neither side then chose to go to the CSA to ask the other side for child maintenance. WHy didn't you? So no maintenance for children was paid for 10 years?

babybarrister Wed 22-Jul-15 08:11:34

I don't agree it is bad drafting - that is the standard wording x pa for y years

You had the right to go to the CSA - if you contact them now then you can make a claim and backdate it for a short period I think - prh will know more details!

RedDaisyRed Wed 22-Jul-15 08:16:56

Don't you think it's a bit strange though to say annually and then to say for one year? I could understand annually for two years or 3 years. Anyway it sounds like none of us think there is any basis to say it means more than a year's money.

Bellemere Wed 22-Jul-15 09:17:06

The OP would have to go to the CMS and they don't back date claims.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now