Family Husband and wife - periodical payments order - jurisdiction to vary after expiry of orderJones v Jones: CA (Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P, Thorpe and Mance LJJ): 30 March 2000

A consent order made at the time of the parties' divorce in 1992 provided, among other things, for periodical payments by the husband to the wife until January 12, 1998.

Following her application to extend and vary issued on January 8, 1998, a district judge had varied the order in the wife's favour on June 16, 1999.

On the husband's appeal the circuit judge, sitting in the same court, followed the observations in G v G (Periodical Payments)[1998] Fam.

1 that 'it is essential not only that an application be made but that an order be made before the term expires' and concluded that there was no jurisdiction to entertain the wife's application which had perished on 12 January 1998.

The wife appealed.Martyn Bennett (instructed by Robyns Owen & Son, Pwllheli) for the wife.

Richard Todd (instructed by Martin & Nierada, Pwllheli) for the husband.Held, allowing the appeal, that where no direction had been made under s.28(1A) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 the court had jurisdiction to vary or extend aperiodical payments order under s.31(1) of the 1973 Act provided that the application invoking the court's statutory power had been issued during the life of that order even though the application was heard and determined after the order had expired.