Pencious & Pencious and Anor

In the matter of Pencious & Pencious and Anor, the husband appealed against the orders made in the Family Court regarding a property settlement between the parties. The husband contested the trial judge’s allocation of property and argued that the judge did not sufficiently account for his contributions. He also argued that the judge mishandled certain loans and the wife's interest in a discretionary trust. The wife and an intervener responded, maintaining that the trial judge's decisions were correct and that the intervener's participation in the proceedings was justified.

The legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge erred in the assessment of the husband's contributions, the treatment of the loans, and the wife's interest in the discretionary trust. The court examined the evidence and submissions presented and found no basis for the husband's claims of error. The court held that the trial judge correctly evaluated the contributions and the loans, and properly considered the wife's interest in the trust. The intervener's participation was also deemed appropriate given the husband's actions.

The court dismissed the husband's appeal and ordered him to pay the wife's and the intervener's costs of the appeal. This included the costs for the separate appeal concerning the order that the husband pay the intervener’s costs. The court found no merit in the husband's arguments and upheld the original orders made by the trial judge.

The orders of the court were that the appeals be dismissed, and the husband pay the wife's and the intervener's costs of the appeals, either by agreement or as assessed if no agreement is reached.