The law has ‘been left in a state of flux’ following a case where a wife’s claim for an equal share of assets was refused despite her husband having been found to have presented incomplete and misleading information during divorce proceedings.
Karen Hart received a limited settlement of assets worth £3.5m out of total resources worth nearly £9.4m after a 23-year marriage because her husband claimed he brought significant wealth to their relationship, even though the judge said he was unable to determine which assets were from the marriage due to the husband’s ‘poor’ approach to disclosure and, at times, ‘deliberately obstructive’ evidence.
Mrs Hart appealed, arguing her settlement was unfair. However, the Court of Appeal dismissed her case last week, in Hart v Hart [2017] EWCA Civ 1306. The case has lasted six years and cost more than £500,000 in legal fees.
Delivering his judgment, Lord Justice Moylan said the trial judge had been entitled to limit Mrs Hart’s settlement to what he felt she needed and that it was ‘an evaluative or discretionary decision’.
Nicola Walker, partner at Irwin Mitchell Private Wealth, who acted for Mrs Hart, said: ‘The decision of the Court of Appeal leaves the law in a state of flux; it allows a trial judge to find that even where it is not properly evidenced, the financial contribution of one spouse outweighs the family and domestic contribution of the other.
‘This can lead to a result that is unfair and discriminatory, as it has done in this case. More such results are likely to follow, with the potential to set the law back more than 20 years.’
