A couple who entered into a separation agreement cannot repudiate it later by taking proceedings under the 1989 Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Act, the Supreme Court decided yesterday. Mr Justice Keane said where parties have entered into a binding contract to dispose of differences that have arisen between them as husband and wife, it would be unjust to allow one party to repudiate that agreement.
The decision arose out of a Circuit Court case involving a Dublin couple who married in 1961 and had two children. As a result of the husband's alcoholic illness, he lost his job and incurred debts.
In 1969, after being in hospital and on the advice of a psychiatrist, he decided the family home should be transferred into his wife's name in trust to give him time to pay off his creditors.
In 1979, the couple entered into a separation agreement. The husband claimed a beneficial interest in the family home in 1986 and the High Court decided the wife should be the sole beneficial owner. The husband then instituted Circuit Court proceedings seeking a judicial separation under the Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Act 1989. He also sought a share in the family home and an order extinguishing his wife's right to a share of his estate. The Circuit Court judge decided that a separation agreement did not of itself bar a subsequent application for a judicial separation under the 1989 Act. But, at the request of the wife's solicitor, the judge asked the Supreme Court's opinion.
Mr Justice Keane said it might seem harsh to deprive a person, who had entered into a separation agreement on the basis of the law formerly applicable, of the right to avail of the more flexible jurisdiction to grant property transfer orders introduced in the 1989 Act. However, it was for the Oireachtas to balance the possible injustice.