header-logo header-logo

Fields of gold?

09 October 2015 / Caroline Bowden
Issue: 7671 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Caroline Bowden examines whether cases containing complex factors, but wealthy spouses, should be easy to settle

The case of Fields v Fields [2015] EWHC 167 (Fam), [2015] All ER (D) 163 (Jun) was a tabloid dream, with its exotic cocktail of a Russian Beauty Queen who was divorcing a five times married, wealthy US lawyer.

Beneath the drama, Mr Justice Holman was frustrated at the case costs of over £1m, out of liquid assets of £4.5m. As each party would retain “considerable prosperity”, he thought it should have been “very easy” to settle.

Yet at the same time, in a judgment of over 13,000 words, he identified multiple complex and disputed issues. He never criticised anyone for defining and probing these issues: indeed they appeared to be vital to his carefully considered order. So what, if anything, makes an out-of-court settlement easier or more likely for the wealthier clients?

The order

The husband earned £1.3m-£1.9m a year and the wife did not work. He was ordered to pay his wife £320,000 a year

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll