The recent judgment of the Court of Appeal in the case of Ray and Karen Parlour ( Parlour v Parlour [2004]) received considerable media attention, with Karen Parlour being awarded annual maintenance for herself and her three children of £444,000 on her former husband’s current income. A case that received far less attention, although it was heard at the same time, was that of Kenneth and Julia McFarlane ( McFarlane v McFarlane [2004]). However, a great deal of what appeared in the national press on Parlour was misleading and, in the cold light of day, the judgment is not quite as sensational as the press portrayed.
Family lawyers had been awaiting the outcome of both cases with some anticipation. Since the House of Lords’ judgment in the case of White v White [2000], the Family courts have quickly progressed to a stage where, in any long marriage between parties of some wealth, the likely outcome is an equal division of capital. Opportunities to depart from equality in such cases are rare these days and normally only occur in cases where there is significant inherited wealth.
