There has been a further case that emphasises the importance of full financial disclosure during court proceedings.
The husband in the case of Zinzen v Zinzen had been an investment banker but had stopped work due to illness. By acting in person he thought he could avoid having to tell the judge about the income he had received from a mystery source since stopping work and avoid having to support his child and wife financially. Instead the judge focused their order on providing for the wife and child so that they are financially secure, leaving him with a property he said he couldn't sell and he hasn't been allowed to appeal.
I meet with clients going through separation, some of whom are tempted to try to hide assets or downplay sources of income , but ultimately it isn't worth it if it means the judge makes findings against them. I help my clients to find their way past the pitfalls of this disclosure process.
Financial provision case in which H and W were both litigants in person and where the H had not disclosed his real financial situation. H was appealing the clean break decision, arguing that he been left with the illiquid assets and that the judge had failed to have regard to the tax liability that would fall on the H. Appeal dismissed.