11/20/2018
START DATE
END DATE
27-Nov-18
T. M. vs. C. M.
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
DIVORCE JURISDICTION
Registrar Alexandra Wheatley
Adam Richards of Marshall Diel & Myers Limited (Claimant lawyer)
Christian Luthi of Conyers Dill & Pearman (Defendant lawyer)
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The divorce petition was filed in 2010 attempted reconciliation for 8 years Petitioner granted leave to file an Amended Petition in 2018 one child of the family Petitioner?s income is primarily from a company she owns 60% of supplemented by dividend payments Respondent?s high income from employer and rental income substantial dispute over monthly expenses and maintenance payments
SUMMARY:
Petitioner?s claim for substantial monthly maintenance for herself and the child Respondent's offer significantly lower extensive dispute over expenses and Respondent's ability to pay
OUTCOMES:
Petitioner awarded $10000 per month for rental accommodation $8500 per month for day-to-day needs $10000 per month towards legal fees Respondent to continue paying for the child's school tuition
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
In favour of Petitioner
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
T. M. vs. C. M.
The divorce petition was filed in 2010 attempted reconciliation for 8 years Petitioner granted leave to file an Amended Petition in 2018 one child of the family Petitioner?s income is primarily from a company she owns 60% of supplemented by dividend payments Respondent?s high income from employer and rental income substantial dispute over monthly expenses and maintenance payments