News | Ex-Wife's Win 25 Years After Marriage Ends
In the latest twist in divorce law deals in England which has led to London being described as the divorce law capital, the ex-wife of a leading barrister was awarded a lump sum of £215,000 from him 25 years after the couple were divorced.
Since the end of the marriage, the wife had been receiving maintenance from her husband. The husband applied to the High Court to stop the payment when his income dropped after his retirement. The court initially ruled that although the wife had no income of her own, she did have substantial assets and the maintenance payments should be terminated because of the husband's reduction in income on retirement.
The general rule is that a lump sum award should only be made in lieu of any maintenance payments, i.e, the husband pays a one off lump sum payment rather than continue to pay ongoing maintenance. The lump sum should also directly reflect the value of the maintenance the wife would be awarded and be based only on the husband's income, rather than relooking at the value of the husband's assets. So for example, if the husband was to pay £500 per month maintenance and it was estimated this would be likely to continue for 10 years, that would mean the husband would pay £60,000 over 10 years. The husband may offer a lump sum of a lower amount, for example, £45,000 on the basis the wife was receiving it all in one go. In this case, as the court had decided maintenance payments should be terminated altogether, and no more maintenance payments paid, it followed that no lump sum should be paid either. However, the wife appealed against the decision and the Appeal Court ruled that it would be wrong for the wife's income to be suddenly cut off without her suffering hardship.
One of the main contentions in this case was that the husband's income post retirement stemmed largely from a pension he had not only built up after divorce from the wife but also to which his second wife had contributed, although the pension fund was in the husband's sole name. It was the court's view that that income stream must be considered, whatever its origins. The wife was awarded a lump sum of £215,000 and her parting shot was "first wives cannot be swept aside at the whim of the rich and powerful".
