Assumption: "If I tell the court my ex is hiding or wasting assets, they'll have to investigate and my ex will be penalised."
1 min readThis content reflects observational insights and lived community experiences. It does not constitute legal advice — always consult a qualified professional for your specific circumstances.
What People Expect
Making serious financial misconduct allegations will force the court to investigate and penalise the other party.
Court Reality
In WK v HN [2026] EWFC 169 (B), the wife alleged the husband had warehoused matrimonial assets — and was ordered to pay £255,654 towards his costs for unsupported claims. An add-back requires evidence of wanton, reckless dissipation AND a contemporaneous intention to deprive the other spouse. Allegations without proof are litigation misconduct — and they are expensive.
Download the card and post it on Facebook, LinkedIn, or wherever you're active. Every share helps another litigant find this before their hearing.
The Gap?
"If I tell the court my ex is hiding or wasting assets, they'll have to investigate and my ex will be penalised."
Court Reality
In WK v HN [2026] EWFC 169 (B), the wife alleged the husband had warehoused matrimonial assets — and was ordered to pay £255,654 towards his costs for unsupported claims.
Seen a gap between what you thought and the reality? Share yours.
familycourtbridge.org
Navigating court alone?
A McKenzie Friend can help you make sense of this in the context of your own case.
Find your supportCookie Consent
We use essential cookies only, such as remembering this choice and keeping you signed in if you create an account. No tracking or analytics cookies are used.