A judgment summons that brought an unpaid divorce lump sum home

By Garry SteedmanPublished 28 October 20269 mins read11 sections

She had a court order for a lump sum, a date for payment and nothing in her bank account. Her former husband carried on running his business as before. When she asked, he said he would pay when it suited him. Our family law specialists advised her on a judgment summons, the procedure that asks the family court to commit someone who can pay a court order but will not. This is an anonymised account.

A lump sum that never arrived

The couple’s financial order followed their divorce. It gave her a lump sum, payable within a few months, so she could buy a modest home for herself and the children. The deadline came and went. A short message followed, then silence.

Meanwhile he took a family holiday abroad and replaced his van with a newer one. She was renting, stretching every month and wondering whether the order meant anything.

If that sounds familiar, you are not being unreasonable. The law gives you real ways to make someone obey a court order.

What the law says about a judgment summons

The power comes from section 5 of the Debtors Act 1869. A court may commit a person who defaults on a sum due under an order for up to six weeks, or until payment. It can do so only where it is proved that the person has, or has had since the order, the means to pay, and has refused or neglected to pay.

Section 11 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 narrows that power. In the family court it applies to maintenance orders. Schedule 8, which section 28 uses to define that term, lists an order for “periodical or other payments” made under Part II of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Section 23, in that Part, holds the power to order a divorce lump sum.

The procedure sits in Chapter 2 of Part 33 of the Family Procedure Rules. Under rule 33.10, the application must come with a statement containing all the evidence the applicant relies on, with a copy of the order attached. Rule 33.11 requires service at least 14 days before the hearing. Rule 33.14 then puts the burden on the person owed the money. She must prove both the means to pay and the refusal or neglect. The same rule says the paying party cannot be compelled to give evidence.

A judgment summons could end in his imprisonment, so we treated every gap in her evidence as a risk. That shaped everything we advised.

What our family law specialists advised

First, we looked at the other ways to enforce. He paid himself a small salary, so an attachment of earnings order would have collected very little. A charging order under section 1 of the Charging Orders Act 1979 would secure the debt against property, but it would not bring the money in soon. A general application on Form D50K, under rule 33.3(2)(b), lets the court choose the method, although it adds a step. She needed the money, and he needed a reason to pay.

Next, we built the evidence. Nobody could make him answer questions, so her case had to stand on her own papers. We helped her gather the disclosure from the original case, the company accounts and bank statements it contained, and his own messages about the holiday and the van.

She then applied for a judgment summons on Form D62, with our guidance, and we helped her prepare the statement that rule 33.10 requires. We advised personal service. Under rule 33.14(2), a summons served only by post cannot lead to committal unless the paying party attends the hearing. Personal service closed that gap. We also prepared her for the hearing.

The outcome at the hearing

He attended. The court found that he had the means to pay the lump sum and had neglected to pay it. It made a committal order and, under rule 33.16(2), suspended it on terms that he paid the lump sum and the costs of the judgment summons by a set date.

He paid in full before that date. A few months later, she bought her home.

Every case turns on its own evidence, so this is not a promise about any other family.

What you can take from this

Choose the method that fits the person who owes you. A steady salary suits an attachment of earnings order. A property suits a charging order. A judgment summons suits someone who has money but will not part with it.

Think about evidence before you apply. The paying party does not have to speak, so your statement must prove the means, through accounts, bank records and spending.

Prison does not wipe out the debt. Section 5 says imprisonment does not satisfy or extinguish it, so the debt remains afterwards. Our guide to the enforcement of financial court orders covers each route. Our page on committal proceedings in the family court explains how committal works. You can also read about lump sum orders and how we prepare these success stories.

“The means test looks back as well as at today. If your former spouse had the money at any point after the order and chose to spend it elsewhere, that can be enough, so build a dated timeline of what came in and went out from the day of the order. Expect an explanation, such as a slow month in the business, and file the bank statements and accounts that answer it with your application.”

Garry Steedman, Family Law Consultant, Kabir Family Law

Talk it through with us

If a lump sum from your divorce has gone unpaid, you do not have to chase it alone. A free initial consultation is confidential and carries no obligation. Tell us what has happened, and our family law specialists will explain whether a judgment summons or another route fits your case.