12/3/2018
START DATE
END DATE
28-Jan-19
C.R.M.R. v K.L.R.
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
DIVORCE JURISDICTION
Hon. Chief Justice Hargun
Mr. Adam Richards
Ms. Jacqueline MacLellan
FACTS OF THE CASE:
3?4 December 2018
SUMMARY:
28-Jan-19
OUTCOMES:
Dispute over maintenance order claimant seeks reduction defendant seeks increase history of financial arrangements and legal actions including freezing injunction child custody conflict and maintenance payments. Parties settled capital claims disagree on maintenance needs and compensation. Claimant's business income declines parties' intentions upon moving to Bermuda and post-separation arrangements detailed. Issues: Appropriate maintenance amount consideration of claimant's decreasing business income defendant's needs and relationship-generated disadvantage. Outcome: Court considers maintenance based on needs generously interpreted factoring in claimant's income and defendant's reasonable expenses rejecting additional claims for lack of evidence or reasonableness. Maintenance ordered with expectations of review for independence. Costs: No order as to costs.
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Defendant for maintenance with considerations for review
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies