D v D

[1]������� In this application the petitioner seeks Ancillary Relief pursuant to a summons dated 13 October 2006.�

[3]������� The only asset which was the subject of the hearing was the matrimonial home. Although the parties each held pensions, the amounts represented by these were small and of equal value. It was agreed by the parties that these cancelled each other out.

[4]������� There was a clear difference of approach between the parties as to the appropriate outcome of the proceedings.� The petitioner sought the transfer of the matrimonial home to her in return for� the payment of a sum of money. The respondent sought a Mesher order, postponing the sale of the matrimonial home and division of the net sale proceeds until the youngest child of the family reached a certain age.

[5]������� The petitioner wife is aged 43 and the respondent husband is aged 40. The parties met at work and subsequently married on 6 April 1990. They were separated in January 2003� and a Decree Nisi was granted on 12 December 2003.� There are two children of the marriage: a son aged 16 and a son aged 12, both of whom live with the petitioner.

[6]������� The parties purchased a home together in 1990. It was subject to 100% finance in that the Co-ownership Housing Association hold a 37% interest in the property and there is a mortgage in favour of Halifax plc. In 1991 both parties were made redundant and since that time the mortgage payments and Co-Ownership instalments have been paid by the DHSS and Housing Benefit respectively. While there was a factual dispute as to how each party�s redundancy payments had been spent, this was not an issue between them for the purpose of this application.