header-logo header-logo

11 March 2015
Issue: 7644 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Ex-wife can pursue windmill millionaire

Lawyers welcomed a unanimous Supreme Court decision to grant a wife permission to seek financial provision from the husband she divorced 22 years ago when he was penniless.

Wyatt v Vince [2015] UKSC 14 concerned an unusual set of circumstances. Ms Wyatt separated from Mr Vince in 1984 and divorced him in 1992 when he was a new age traveller living in a disused ambulance. She brought up their children in straitened circumstances but Mr Vince went on to develop a successful windmill business and is now a multi-millionaire.

Michael Gouriet, partner in Withers' family law team, says: “The extraordinary circumstances of this case make it an extremely rare beast and, as such, it will not open the floodgates on historic claims being reopened and appealed.

“The judgment merely stresses that Ms Wyatt is entitled to be heard and the key resulting question is whether she will now get any retrospective award in recognition of her contribution for raising their son. The judgment warns of the 'formidable difficulties' she faces in this regard, but the hint at fairness indicates that she may not leave empty-handed.”

Deborah Jeff, partner and head of family at Seddons, says: “This decision brings some helpful clarity to interpretation of matrimonial law regarding the factors that are taken into account when deciding a financial settlement.

“Whilst at first glance Ms Wyatt’s claim appears to be unreasonable and out of time, further analysis of the case reveals her ongoing contribution to the family by caring for the parties’ son post-separation. It was during such time that Mr Vince began building his business empire and in the eyes of the law contributions of both a financial and non-financial nature are equally valuable.  

“It has been the passage of time before making such claim against Mr Vince that most lawyers struggle with in justifying the wife’s application. However, this ruling appears to suggest that the number of years that have elapsed is just another factor that must be taken into account in determining the wife’s claim and indeed all such factors must be considered under s 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. It certainly doesn’t time-bar the application. 

“Whilst it may be seen to open the floodgates to other former spouses in similar circumstances, the final determination of the wife’s claim by a High Court judge will no doubt give further guidance to applications in similar circumstances.”

 

Issue: 7644 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll