header-logo header-logo

21 June 2007 / Nicholas E Starks
Issue: 7278 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Fair shares?

Does Charman v Charman mean farewell to the yardstick of equality? asks Nicholas Starks

Charman v Charman [2006] EWHC 1879 (Fam), [2006] All ER (D) 32 (Aug), a decision of Mr Justice Coleridge, was the first reported case to consider the ramifications of the House of Lords’ decision in Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24, [2006] 3 All ER 1. It also involved the largest reported award (£48m) in an ancillary relief case. Central to the case was the issue of “stellar contributions”: given a 27-year marriage—to which the wife had fully contributed—and huge assets—£131m, generated by the singular talent of the husband—should the court depart from equality of division to reflect the husband’s wealth generation and, if so, how far?

The appeal of Coleridge J’s decision was handed down on 24 May 2007 ([2007] EWCA Civ 503, [2007] All ER (D) 425 (May)), on the anniversary of the Lords’ decision in Miller; McFarlane. The Court of Appeal has abandoned the pretence of a yardstick of equality and heralded in a

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll