Unger & Anor v Ul-Hasan (deceased) & Anor [2023] UKSC 22 (28 June 2023)
Citation:Unger & Anor v Ul-Hasan (deceased) & Anor [2023] UKSC 22 (28 June 2023)
Rule of thumb:If a man dies without paying maintenance payments owed to an ex-wife, can these be claimed against the man’s estate? No, once a man dies, all payments he may have owed to an ex-wife are all extinguished and the wife can no longer be paid these as a creditor.
Background facts:The facts of this case were that a man & wife got divorced. As per the terms of the divorce settlement, the ex-wife was to paid periodic sums. However, the man then died, and his survivors in his will wanted the estate divided up amongst them, with the ex-wife to get nothing from the estate to pay for the potential claim for under-payment of maintenance.
Parties argued:The wife argued that as per the terms of the settlement she was entitled to maintenance payments from the husband which were under-paid, and she wanted these taken out of the estate as a creditor who was owed money. The man’s survivors argued that a deceased person no longer has to fulfil any personal obligations, and these did not pass on to his survivors, so the woman was not entitled to any money for under-payment of maintenance.
Court held:The Court upheld the argument’s of the man’s survivors. This Judgment was passed with some consternation by the Court, but the Court affirmed that the family law Acts regulating this clearly stated that personal obligations a person had, which the divorce payments were, ceased upon death and the legality of those payments could no longer be adjudicated by the Court with the man deceased & unable to put his point across. The Court sympathised with the wife’s arguments, but explained that the legislation was so clearly written that it would require Parliament to pass an Act upholding what the woman wanted, so the woman was entitled to none of the alleged under-payment of maintenance for the period before the man’s death.
Ratio-decidendi:
‘The complex interplay between Part III (and the 1973 Act) on the one hand and the Inheritance Act on the other also means that reform aimed at remedying the injustice that results from the limited ability to make a financial order after either party to the marriage has died would require an overall view to be taken of both legislative regimes and of how they do, and should, interact. Only Parliament is competent to undertake that task and to make and implement the policy choices that would be involved. It is not open to this court to cut the Gordian knot and achieve a solution by interpretation of the existing statutory provisions’, Lord Leggatt at 141.
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.