I'm looking for details on a family law case: Maskell v Maskell.
 
I don't have a date but it is recent law as it relates to a divorce case
where a pension was taken into account.  'Pension should not be viewed in
the same way as other liquid capital assets'.

Hello astrometrics, 


Here is one mention of the case that I found with some compressed
details:
text in [] was inserted by myself.

"Maskell v Maskell [2001] 3 FCR 296 CA
W ? H 41 [assuming W is wife, H is Husband aged 41]
Described as a long marriage, 3 children under 14 (alternate weeks
with each parent)
H's pension - £32,000 (cetv), fmh - 26,000, policies - £10,000
Decision:
Before DJ and CJ:
W - fmh plus a £6,000 policy [fmh might be family home?]
H - pension and a £4,000 policy
Thorpe LJ allowed H's appeal and invited parties to attend mediation. 
He said " .. the judge is making the seemingly somewhat elementary
mistake of confusing present capital with a right to financial
benefits on retirement .. He simply failed to compare like with like."
Comment:      
Costs!! A nightmare!  No solution for the parties other than
mediation.  Useful case though (particularly if there are few assets)
and you are for H with a modest pension. Compare S v S (medium/big
money) above."
SOURCE: http://www.onegardencourt.co.uk/news/pensions_seminar.htm

The comments above are probably referring to the fact that appealing
this case results in more expenses for both the husband and the wife.
You can read about the S v S case at the URL above.

The only other possibly useful information I was able to pull up was
this:
Orleans Family Court
02/19/03 at 09:30 AM      
Maskell vs. Maskell
Room main
64-4-00 Osdm/Divorce
Walter M. Morris, Jr.
Motion Hearing
SOURCE (Google cache):
http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:UDm1sEwtLvsC:www.state.vt.us/courts/atty/O_cal.htm+%22maskell+vs.+maskell%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

I have no idea if this is the same case, but it would mean that it was
not settled as of February 2003.

I was unable to come up with more information on the internet
regarding this case. I hope that it includes the level of detail that
you were expecting. If you need any clarifications regarding this
answer, please let me know through a clarification and I will do my
best to further assist you.

tisme-ga


Search Strategy: 

"maskell v. maskell"
://www.google.com/search?q=%22maskell+v%2E+maskell%22

maskell divorce pension
://www.google.com/search?q=maskell+divorce+pension