Cacho v Cacho

• Jurisdiction: Cayman Islands
• Judge: Malone, C.J.
• Judgment Date: 02 October 1991
• Court: Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
• Docket Number: D23 of 1990
• Date: 02 October 1991

Cacho

and

Cacho

Malone, C.J.

D23 of 1990

Grand Court

Family law - Husband and wife — Divorce — Ancillary relief — Maintenance of wife and children — Settlement of matrimonial property.

Appearances:

Mrs. E. Maierhofer for the Petitioner.

Mr. D. Murray for the Respondent.

RULING

Malone, C.J.

1 These proceedings are ancillary to the divorce granted to the petitioner after sixteen years of marriage to the respondent.

2 The petitioner's income is $2,374.00 per month. She calculates her expenses to be $3,516.00 per month. The excess of expenditure over income is reduced to $662.00 per month by a monthly payment of $480.00 made by the respondent towards the maintenance of the three children of the marriage. The respondent's income is not less than $2,469.00 per month. Apart from the $480.00 payment that he makes monthly towards the maintenance of the three children he has made no other regular contribution since leaving the matrimonial home in 1991 as I do not accept that he has contributed $550.00 monthly towards the cost of food. His expenses per month are $2,230.44 so that his income exceeds his expenses by $238.56.

3 Two of the three children attend a private school to which the petitioner pays $287.50 per month by way of school fees. The respondent has, however, offered to pay half the school fees per month. That payment would reduce the excess of the petitioner's expenditure over income to $518.25 and would reduce the excess of the respondent's income over expenditure to $95.11. In my view it is not sufficient to divide evenly the costs of schooling between the parties as the children's lunches at school have increased by $155.00 per month. A further contribution from the respondent of $100.00 per month is, I think, justified. The Petitioner's excess of expenditure over income then falls to $418.25 and the respondent's excess of income over expenditure is turned into an excess of expenditure over income amounting to $4.98.

4 The earnings of the parties appear to be comparatively equal but may be that the respondent's income is greater than has been disclosed if, as is likely, he works overtime. The known earnings of the parties total $4,843.00 per month of which one third would be $1,614.33. Because of the division of the beneficial interest in the matrimonial home, that I intend to order and because the petitioner has an income of her own, the one third guideline is not, in my view, applicable in this instance. I shall order that the respondent do pay to the petitioner $420.00 per month by way of maintenance. That payment will ensure that the petitioner's expenditure does not exceed her income. It is also, in my view, a payment that the respondent can meet. For if he does not work overtime or the overtime work is not sufficient to meet the payment, he can always...