Un-named, but one for the boys?

The Telegraph reported last Wednesday (“Wife loses bid for bigger payout from estranged husband”, Victoria Ward) on an anonymised judgment handed down by Mr Justice Mostyn, resolving the financial claims of 2 divorcing Americans. At issue was the division of the family’s estimated wealth of £9.714 million.  The wife, aged 46, wanted her husband’s pre-marriage assets of £2.1 million shared equally between them, to fund her (by now) accustomed lifestyle. The husband, who had given up earning £1.5m a year at a Scandinavian bank in 2007 to become a teacher earning just £52,000 (“doing a Granatino?”) had offered his wife £4.17 million. She thought that almost insufficient to meet her reasonable needs and accused her husband of deliberately chopping his income.

In Mr Justice Mostyn’s view the husband was not to be criticised for “moving into a happier and more fulfilling field” but allowed the husband to keep just £1million of his pre-marital wealth, assigning £240,000 to the 2 children’s education before splitting the balance equally between the husband and wife. Net effect, wife received £4,237,000 and the husband £5,237,000. Certainly worth the costs the husband must have spent on his representation, probably not so for the wife, who “gained” just £67,000 on the husband’s offer.

Jeremy Abraham