Switzerland, Not London, the Right Venue for Big Money Divorce

10th October 2018 By Arman Khosravi

The perceived generosity of English judges in big money divorce cases has made the UK the venue of choice for some – but anathema for others. However, as one case showed, judicial priorities have more to do with fairness than finance.

The case concerned a Swiss-born billionaire businessman, much of whose wealth derived from his father. Prior to his marriage to his British wife, the couple signed a pre-marital agreement that sought to protect his family property from any future financial claims she might make if the marriage ended in divorce. She alleged that she had been given no choice but to sign the document.

The couple were together for 18 years and had two children before the marriage broke down. The wife launched a divorce petition in London, shortly before the husband did the same in Switzerland. In those circumstances, the husband applied for a stay of the wife’s petition on the basis that Switzerland was clearly the more appropriate forum for the proceedings.

In ruling on the issue, the High Court noted that, although the wife said that she wished to make her home in England, she had been living in Switzerland for 11 years with the children, only spending about 30 nights a year in this country. She was therefore neither resident nor domiciled in England, and the English courts would have no jurisdiction to consider her petition unless she moved back to this country.

The Court observed that there was no doubt that a Swiss judge would uphold the full force of the pre-marital agreement, but noted that it did not restrict the wife’s right to maintenance. Her argument that an English judge would more fairly assess her financial needs really amounted to a statement that she was likely to fare better were the divorce heard in England.

The wife had issued her petition unilaterally, without giving notice to the husband, and the Court rejected arguments that she would be denied substantial justice in Switzerland. In those circumstances, the Court stayed the English proceedings and directed that they should stand dismissed on finalisation of the Swiss divorce.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Challenge to Will's Validity Rejected by High Court

12th April, 2024 By

The best way to ensure your assets will be distributed as you wish is to have your will professionally drafted by a qualified solicitor. In a recent case, a challenge to the validity of an elderly man's will was dismissed by the High Court. The man had previously made a will in 2011, leaving most of his estate equally to his three children. In 2018, by which time one of his sons had predeceased him, he made a further will, leaving the residue of his estate to his other son...

Defiance of Family Court Orders Will Always End Badly

10th April, 2024 By

Custodial sentences very rarely come into play in the family courts. Where there have been repeated breaches of court orders, however, judges may have little choice but to clamp down. This was illustrated in the High Court during committal proceedings that stemmed from a child custody dispute. The background to the case involved contested proceedings between the father and mother of a young child. These concluded with a court order establishing that the child – a daughter – would live with the mother. Three months later the daughter travelled with...

Claim for SDLT Relief on Annex Unsuccessful

8th April, 2024 By

When buying a property consisting of more than one residence, it may be possible to claim multiple dwellings relief (MDR) against Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT). However, there are certain conditions that must be met for an MDR claim to succeed, as a recent case illustrates. A property was purchased for £1.8 million. Prior to the purchase, the buyer had agreed with the seller that he would be allowed to carry out works to construct a self-contained annex at the property. The buyer's SDLT return included a claim for MDR...

Divorce – Alleged Bigamy Raised in Financial Remedies Dispute

5th April, 2024 By

The issue of bigamy and its potential impact on a person's ability to seek financial remedies in a divorce came under the legal spotlight recently. A husband made an application to strike out his wife's financial remedies claim on the basis that she had committed bigamy and deceived him into a marriage when she knew she was not free to marry. This deceit, he claimed, was so egregious that, as a matter of public policy, she should be debarred from pursuing any claim for financial remedies against him. The husband based...