Welcome to Intelligent Divorce

The Money and Divorce blog is brought to you by Intelligent Divorce, the new way to get fixed-fee specialist legal advice on splitting your money when you divorce.

Our blog provides illustrated practical guides for those going through the divorce process, plus news on divorce, money and family breakdown.

"I would like to let you know that I found your website so invaluable in my divorce process. I am having to represent myself due to lack of finances and I know for a fact I wouldn't have been able to do it had it not been for your fantastic website. I would recommend it to anyone who find themselves in a similar situation to me." Madeleine

2 November 2015

'Well-known' footballer wins High Court battle to reduce child maintenance payments

A ‘well-known’ footballer has won a High Court appeal to reduce the amount of child maintenance he pays, reports ITV News.

The unnamed player is in his early 30s and has two children aged 10 and five by different mothers.

He had complained that a local family court judge was wrong in ordering him to pay £30,000-a-year for each child - arguing that £60,000 a year was about a third of his gross annual income and was too much.

A High Court judge ruled in his favour and said Deputy District Judge Jane Drew had made mistakes in the way she formulated figures.

Mr Justice Mostyn analysed an appeal by the footballer at a private hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London and said Deputy District Judge Drew should reconsider the case.

Mr Justice Mostyn explained how Deputy District Judge Drew had said of the footballer: ‘The impression I formed was that he was a man who was determined to put his own expenditure and enjoyment first and his obligations to his children came a very poor second.’

Mr Justice Mostyn cut the total sum the footballer must pay to around £30,000 - pending decisions made after any fresh hearing before Judge Drew.

The judge heard that the footballer was ‘in arrears’ on payments and would ‘have some explaining to do’ if the arrears were not discharged in the ‘near future’.