ABSTRACT
Duxbury v Duxbury (1987) CA H and W lived in a very expensive fashion. W had not brought any capital into the marriage and had not engaged in any paid employment. In pursuit of the ‘clean break’ principle, the judge had made an order involving a very large lump sum. H appealed, arguing that the judge had exercised his discretion incorrectly by not taking into account that the man with whom W was living would derive considerable financial benefit from the payment of the lump sum.
