fbpx

Equal Sharing Principle Delivers Fair Result in £6 Million Divorce Case

22nd April 2022 By

When it comes to divorce, it is very common for one spouse to argue that he or she should receive the lion’s share of the marital wealth. However, as a guideline case concerning an entrepreneurial couple showed, fairness usually demands that an equal contribution to a marriage is reflected in an equal division of assets.

In the early days of their 15-year marriage, the wife acted as primary carer for their two children whilst the husband was the main breadwinner. Both were, however, impressive financial performers and their marital assets were worth almost £6 million. The majority of that – more than £4 million – was made up of their shareholdings in a company in which they had each held senior roles.

Both husband and wife proposed a division of assets that represented a significant departure from equality. He asserted that he should receive 60.9 per cent of the marital wealth, whereas she contended that 57.5 per cent of it should be allocated to her.

She pointed out that, whilst she was currently unemployed, he continued to work for the company and receive a substantial salary. He asserted that, post divorce, she would have the majority of their property and other tangible assets, whereas his financial future would be heavily reliant on the uncertain value of the company’s shares, which were not readily tradeable.

Ruling on the matter, a family judge was impressed by the wife’s commitment to hard work, tenacity and positive outlook. She was studying for a master’s degree at a leading university and had substantial future earning capacity. The husband took an optimistic view of the company’s future and it was his choice to receive most of his portion of the marital assets in the form of shares.

The judge concluded that the couple’s respective arguments in favour of a departure from equality broadly balanced each other out. The sharing principle and a roughly even division of the marital wealth represented the fairest outcome. The wife was awarded 50.1 per cent of the assets and the husband 49.9 per cent.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Tenants Can Purchase Freehold When Landlord Cannot Be Found

11th June, 2024 By

The Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 gives qualifying leaseholders the right to join together to buy the freehold of their properties – a process known as collective enfranchisement. A recent case demonstrated that this right can be exercised even when the landlord cannot be found. The leaseholders of two flats in a terraced house wished to purchase it from the landlord, but were unable to ascertain his whereabouts and therefore could not serve notice on him under Section 13 of the Act. They therefore applied for an...

Court Refuses to Set Aside Divorce Order Applied for by Mistake

6th June, 2024 By

While the courts have a range of powers to set aside orders, they will only exercise them in limited circumstances. In a somewhat surprising case that has attracted much comment, the High Court declined to set aside a final order of divorce that had been applied for by mistake. A couple separated in January 2023, after more than 21 years of marriage. In October that year, while financial remedy proceedings were still ongoing, the wife's legal representatives inadvertently applied for a final order of divorce in respect of her instead...

Waiting Time for Grants of Probate Falls

3rd June, 2024 By

Following concerns last year about delays in processing probate applications, recent figures from HM Courts and Tribunals Service show that waiting times for grants of probate are continuing to improve. The average time from submission of a probate application to probate being granted fell to 11.3 weeks in March 2024, a decrease from 13.7 weeks in February and 13.8 weeks in January. This is the lowest figure since March 2023, when the average was 10.8 weeks. The longest waiting time since then was in November, at 15.8 weeks: that month,...

Late Appeal Against Tax Penalties Rejected

31st May, 2024 By

It is incumbent on taxpayers to make sure they fully comply with their obligations to file returns and pay any tax due. The point was illustrated by a recent case in which a taxpayer whose return had not been received by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) failed to persuade the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) that he should be permitted to appeal against the resulting penalties. On the evening of 31 January 2014, the man had completed his 2012/13 Income Tax return on HMRC's website. Shortly afterwards he went to Cyprus, and...