Family Court Departs from Equality in Big-Money Divorce Case

The Family Court has ruled in financial remedy proceedings that a departure from an equal division of assets was appropriate in view of the fact that riskier and less liquid business assets would be retained by the husband.

The husband and wife had met in January 1994 and married nearly three years later. The wife was a homemaker and the husband was an investor and financier with a proven track record of acquiring and turning round distressed businesses. They enjoyed an exceptionally high standard of living during the marriage, commensurate with their wealth, and following a restructuring of their assets to minimise future tax they had complex business assets and corporate interests. They separated in 2021 and filed a joint application for divorce in November 2022. A conditional order was made six months later.

The husband and wife agreed that the marriage had been one of equal contribution and that the case was a sharing and not a needs case. The wife sought an equal division of their assets while the husband contended for a 60:40 split in his favour. They also disagreed about the value of the assets, the wife contending that they were worth £105 million and the husband £72 million. They had broadly agreed which assets each should retain, with the main areas of dispute being the amount and timing of the lump sums the husband would pay to the wife. However, the husband wished to retain their property in Spain, in which he lived, while the wife sought its sale and division of the proceeds.

The Court accepted the valuation of the Spanish property of £14.7 million contended for by the wife. After considering arguments on the values of their various business interests, including two companies and a number of loan notes, the Court arrived at a valuation of their assets of £89.5 million. Their chattels, including jewellery, artwork, the wife's cars and the husband's watches, boat and vehicle, were excluded from the computation.

The Court concluded that there should be a 'court discount' as the husband would retain business assets which were risky and uncertain, while the wife would retain more liquid assets. The Court considered that a 5 per cent departure from an equal division was appropriate. The husband would therefore receive about £49.2 million and the wife about £40.3 million.

The Court saw no reason why the husband should not retain the Spanish property. However, if he were unable to pay the wife the relevant lump sums by a date agreed between them or decided by the Court, a deferred order for sale would be made. They would each retain their own personal possessions, and the Court hoped that the other chattels could be divided by agreement.

 

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.