ES2 Explainer
The ES2 is the asset schedule used in financial remedy proceedings — one shared table setting out every asset, with two columns recording what each party says it's worth. Edit the table below to see how it really works. If you agree with the figure the other person has put forward, you put the same figure in your own column — matching figures mean agreement, not a mistake or duplication.
The ES2 is the single shared schedule of assets used in financial remedy proceedings. It's easy to misread the "H's case" and "W's case" columns as if each person is filing their own separate list of what belongs to them — this tool lets you enter a few figures of your own and see, in plain English, what the columns are actually recording.
Important
- This tool makes no judgement on whether any asset is matrimonial or non-matrimonial, and no judgement on settlement. It's for understanding how the form works, not for valuing your case.
- It isn't a mirror image of the actual ES2. The real form has more categories, sub-totals and structure than shown here — this is simplified to illustrate the concept.
- "Properties (net)" here is simplified to a single figure for ease of use. On the actual ES2, property values are shown as gross value less mortgage, sale costs, and any ERC (early repayment charge) to arrive at the net figure.
- This tool doesn't replace legal advice. Every case turns on its own facts, and if you're unsure how any of this applies to yours, speak to a solicitor, McKenzie Friend, or other qualified adviser before relying on it.
- Nothing you enter here is saved or stored anywhere — it exists only in your browser for this session and disappears when you close or refresh the page. Use the 'Download as PDF' button below if you want to keep a copy.
| Asset name | H's case (£) | W's case (£) | |
|---|---|---|---|
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "Family Home" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Owned by: | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "H's Savings Account" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "W's Savings Account" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "W's Investment Portfolio" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "H's Pension CETV" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "W's SIPP" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "H's Consulting Ltd (shares)" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "Contents & Jewellery" figures differ? | |||
Owned by: | |||
Why do the "Inherited Art Collection" figures differ? Who's saying it shouldn't be shared? Why, if known? (optional) | |||
Owned by: This debt is: Matching figures on a sole debt usually mean agreement that the debt exists and is genuine — it's recorded on the ES2 either way. It doesn't automatically mean it reduces the shared pot: the court generally expects each party to be responsible for their own debts unless there's a reason to treat this one as marital. | |||
Owned by: This debt is: Matching figures on a sole debt usually mean agreement that the debt exists and is genuine — it's recorded on the ES2 either way. It doesn't automatically mean it reduces the shared pot: the court generally expects each party to be responsible for their own debts unless there's a reason to treat this one as marital. | |||
Owned by: This debt is: Matching figures on a sole debt usually mean agreement that the debt exists and is genuine — it's recorded on the ES2 either way. It doesn't automatically mean it reduces the shared pot: the court generally expects each party to be responsible for their own debts unless there's a reason to treat this one as marital. | |||
| Total | £1,156,200 | £1,316,200 | |
| Grand Totals | H's Case | W's Case |
|---|---|---|
| Properties (net) | £615,000 | £645,000 |
| Bank accounts | £51,700 | £52,700 |
| Investments/Policies | £107,000 | £120,000 |
| Business Interests | £85,000 | £120,000 |
| Chattels | £20,000 | £27,000 |
| Other | £0 | £35,000 |
| Liabilities | -£23,500 | -£12,000 |
| TOTAL NON-PENSION | £855,200 | £987,700 |
| Pensions | £313,000 | £352,000 |
| TOTAL INC. PENSIONS | £1,168,200 | £1,339,700 |
Debts marked as one party's sole responsibility are only subtracted from that party's own total above — not from the other party's total. Marking a debt 'sole responsibility' means it isn't treated as reducing the shared pot, even if both sides agree the figure is genuine.
MYTH
The H's case and W's case columns are often misread as two separate lists — as if each person is submitting their own private inventory of what's mine. That's not what they're for.
CORRECT
It's one shared document. Each row is a single asset, and the two columns record disagreement on value — not separate ownership claims.
Disagreements
- Family Home — H's case £450,000, W's case £480,000. They differ by £30,000 — a value disagreement. W values it higher.
- H's Savings Account — H's case £28,500, W's case £26,000. They differ by £2,500 — a value disagreement. H values it higher.
- W's Savings Account — H's case £19,000, W's case £22,500. They differ by £3,500 — a value disagreement. W values it higher.
- W's Investment Portfolio — H's case £65,000, W's case £78,000. They differ by £13,000 — a value disagreement. W values it higher.
- H's Pension CETV — H's case £215,000, W's case £240,000. They differ by £25,000 — a value disagreement. W values it higher.
- W's SIPP — H's case £98,000, W's case £112,000. They differ by £14,000 — a value disagreement. W values it higher.
- H's Consulting Ltd (shares) — H's case £85,000, W's case £120,000. They differ by £35,000 — a value disagreement. W values it higher.
- Contents & Jewellery — H's case £8,000, W's case £15,000. They differ by £7,000 — a value disagreement. W values it higher.
- Inherited Art Collection — H's case £0, W's case £35,000. H says this shouldn't be shared at all, saying it was inherited, while W says it should be treated as part of the marital pot. It's legally held in H's sole name, but legal ownership on its own doesn't settle this. That's a dispute over characterisation — and it's usually decided on the facts (source of funds, timing, how it's been treated during the marriage), not by splitting the difference between the two figures.
Questions & answers
About this tool
This interactive ES2 explainer was designed by Deborah Jones, a McKenzie Friend listed on Bridge The Gap — a free, community-built platform helping litigants in person navigate the family court.
If you found this tool useful, Bridge The Gap has more to help you:
- A full plain-English guide to the ES2 form and the ES1 form
- Community insights — real gaps, dilemmas, and stories from litigants who've been through it
- A directory of McKenzie Friends you can contact directly, including Deborah's profile
Bridge The Gap provides observational insights and collective community experiences only — not legal advice.
If you need help understanding or filling in your ES2, let me know — and if your situation is complex, get independent legal advice before relying on anything here.
Get in touchSimplified illustration only — not a mirror of the actual ES2, and not a view on your case. For wider guidance on completing court paperwork, see our companion site's help with family court forms.