LEGAL PRACTICE COURSE
In-Session – Cooper Case Study: Confidential Information for the Petitioner
Mrs Cooper wishes to retain the former matrimonial home (FMH) until the children are
no longer dependant on her. The location of FMH is convenient for her mother who
provides free childcare; and is near children’s schools. This will minimise disruption
to the children. She knows that the property is worth a lot more than other 3 bedroom
properties in Northwood but believes that the standard of living enjoyed during the
marriage should entitle her to stay.
The bank has told Mrs Cooper that they will lend her up to £100,000 by way of a
mortgage; the monthly repayments would be in region of £350 per month.
Mrs Cooper accepts that she may have to rehouse but wants to avoid this if at all
possible. If she has to, she has seen some nice properties for £470,000. Mr Cooper
has found estate agent particulars for houses in the region of £450,000. These are
not in a nice end of town and Mrs Cooper thinks they all look too small and scruffy.
She does wish to downsize.
The Respondent earns significantly more than he declares for tax purposes and on
Form E. Mrs Cooper estimates that he earns at least £550 p/w in cash in addition to
that noted on his Form E.
Mrs Cooper would like a substantive periodical payment order. She would like around
£900 p/m but would settle for a periodic payment in region of £700 p/m if needs be.
A dispute may arise in relation to her jewellery. She believes it is worth £5,000; Mr
Cooper alleges it is worth more. She did insure the jewellery for £10,000 ‘to be on
the safe side’ but does not think she can sell it for more than £5,000.
Mrs Cooper contends Respondent’s cohabitant can and should contribute to that
household’s income. She does not know whether she is trained to do a particular job
but does not accept that she should pay for her to be a housewife.
Mrs Cooper is an only child. Her mother is in her 70’s and is in fairly good health. Her
mother is fairly wealthy but Mrs Cooper believes that she could be waiting 15 to 20
years for any inheritance. Mrs Cooper’s father died some time ago. His whole estate
passed to her mother but she does receives £10,000 p/a from a trust fund he set up
on her behalf. This payment is paid on a half yearly basis (i.e. £5,000 every
December and £5,000 every June). Mr Cooper is aware of the trust fund but not the
amount she receives – Mrs Cooper would like it to stay that way.
Mrs Cooper’s mother does assist quite a bit e.g. childcare and pays the school fees
(and supplementary costs).
As a last resort this may be used in negotiating. Mrs Cooper’s mother is prepared
to offer her financial assistance to buy Mr Cooper’s share in the FMH. Her mother is
prepared to offer up to £200,000 but hopes that Mr Cooper’s interest can be secured
for much less than this.
docs_600917961.docx 1/2 © City, University of London 2019
In-Session – Cooper Case Study: Confidential Information for the Petitioner
Mrs Cooper wishes to retain the former matrimonial home (FMH) until the children are
no longer dependant on her. The location of FMH is convenient for her mother who
provides free childcare; and is near children’s schools. This will minimise disruption
to the children. She knows that the property is worth a lot more than other 3 bedroom
properties in Northwood but believes that the standard of living enjoyed during the
marriage should entitle her to stay.
The bank has told Mrs Cooper that they will lend her up to £100,000 by way of a
mortgage; the monthly repayments would be in region of £350 per month.
Mrs Cooper accepts that she may have to rehouse but wants to avoid this if at all
possible. If she has to, she has seen some nice properties for £470,000. Mr Cooper
has found estate agent particulars for houses in the region of £450,000. These are
not in a nice end of town and Mrs Cooper thinks they all look too small and scruffy.
She does wish to downsize.
The Respondent earns significantly more than he declares for tax purposes and on
Form E. Mrs Cooper estimates that he earns at least £550 p/w in cash in addition to
that noted on his Form E.
Mrs Cooper would like a substantive periodical payment order. She would like around
£900 p/m but would settle for a periodic payment in region of £700 p/m if needs be.
A dispute may arise in relation to her jewellery. She believes it is worth £5,000; Mr
Cooper alleges it is worth more. She did insure the jewellery for £10,000 ‘to be on
the safe side’ but does not think she can sell it for more than £5,000.
Mrs Cooper contends Respondent’s cohabitant can and should contribute to that
household’s income. She does not know whether she is trained to do a particular job
but does not accept that she should pay for her to be a housewife.
Mrs Cooper is an only child. Her mother is in her 70’s and is in fairly good health. Her
mother is fairly wealthy but Mrs Cooper believes that she could be waiting 15 to 20
years for any inheritance. Mrs Cooper’s father died some time ago. His whole estate
passed to her mother but she does receives £10,000 p/a from a trust fund he set up
on her behalf. This payment is paid on a half yearly basis (i.e. £5,000 every
December and £5,000 every June). Mr Cooper is aware of the trust fund but not the
amount she receives – Mrs Cooper would like it to stay that way.
Mrs Cooper’s mother does assist quite a bit e.g. childcare and pays the school fees
(and supplementary costs).
As a last resort this may be used in negotiating. Mrs Cooper’s mother is prepared
to offer her financial assistance to buy Mr Cooper’s share in the FMH. Her mother is
prepared to offer up to £200,000 but hopes that Mr Cooper’s interest can be secured
for much less than this.
docs_600917961.docx 1/2 © City, University of London 2019
