Yes, it was.
My divorce solicitor had made it quite clear that my 40% maintenance was to be (Gross Income) less Tax and Insurance. ( Net Income) It was never disputed during the correspondence between the 2 solicitors. Expenses were never ever discussed. It was a few years before I became aware that my maintenance payments hardly compared with my ex husbands success. The information I received from his accountant was just an annual certificate showing the income after taxes etc had been paid. Again - nothing showing expenses. I was advised by an accountant to request a full breakdown. Consequently - after receiving that information I sought the help of (firstly) my divorce solicitor, who confirmed her explanation for 40% of Gross income being after Income Tax & Insurance (Net Income) I then found myself a less expensive solicitor. She corresponded with my ex's divorce solicitor who's response was (My ex was self employed and therefore entitled to claim all expenses before IncomeTax etc.
Not once, during the enormous amount of correspondence between the acting solicitor's were expenses ever mentioned. The definition had been made clear by my solicitor, and were never disputed during that time. His solicitor has since claimed that as my solicitor had not defined her explanation in the 'Consent Order' it doesn't apply.
Quote:- The formula for the calculation of maintenance being
1) Based on the " Previous " Calendar Year's earnings of Mr Andrews.
Less: Income Tax
Less: National Insurance
13.12.2005:- Quote:- Ditto.
03.03.2006 Ref c/81/AND 26-1/SLC
Quote:/ Mr Andrews to pay spousal Maintenance for joint lives to be calculated in accordance with paragraphs 6,6.1 and 6.2 of the agreement dated 14th Oct. 2004.
An absolute prerequisite.
The Net earnings to be defined as Gross earnings less National Insurance and Paye Income Tax.
This was never questioned or disputed by ex's solicitor.
Bury St Edmunds,