Guernsey Legal Resources

    Guernsey follows the English Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s.31(2) in relation to the variation of financial orders in matrimonial proceedings. Orders for periodical payments can be varied, but capital orders, such as lump sum and property adjustment orders, normally cannot. There are clear and obvious reasons for not varying a consent order (made with the express agreement of the parties); and such an order cannot normally be the subject of an appeal, but may be set aside for (a) the non-disclosure of some essential matter; (b) fraud or misrepresentation; (c) supervening events which invalidate the whole basis of the order; or (d) undue influence.

    For “supervening events” to be a valid reason for challenging a consent order, it is not enough that the facts appear different from the way they appeared at the time of the original order (e.g. McGladdery v. McGladdery, [1999] 2 FLR 1102), but rather that new events should very rapidly invalidate the fundamental basis of the original order—frequently within the first year—and without causing prejudice to third parties (Barder v. Caluori, [1988] A.C. 20, observations of Lord Brandon of Oakbrook applied). An application for variation made to the original court would also normally be available and governed by the same principles (Robinson v. Robinson, [1983] 4 FLR 102, observations of Ormrod, L.J. applied; Fournier v. Fournier, [1998] 2 FLR 990, observations of Lord Woolf, M.R. applied).