header-logo header-logo

Sharp proves exception to the equal sharing principle

16 June 2017
Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

A former wife has successfully challenged a ruling that her ex-husband should get half of the fortune she built up during their marriage.

The Court of Appeal heard that both parties earned about £100,000 during their six-year relationship but the wife, a trader, received bonuses worth £10.5m, in Sharp v Sharp [2017] EWCA Civ 408. The couple, in their early 40s with no children, had matrimonial assets of £5.45m at the time of the divorce.

The High Court awarded the husband capital worth £2.75m. Ms Sharp appealed. Lord Justice McFarlane, giving the lead ruling, noted that the principle that the matrimonial assets of a divorcing couple should normally be shared between them on an equal basis was established by the House of Lords in the 2001 case of White v White. ‘The present appeal requires this court to consider whether that is inevitably the case where the marriage has been short, there are no children, the couple have both worked and maintained separate finances, and where one of them has been paid very substantial bonuses during their time together,’ he said.

The court held that the circumstances of the marriage were sufficient to depart from the equal sharing principle, and ordered that the husband receive a lump sum of £900,000 plus a property valued at £1.1m.

Jacqueline Major, head of the family team at Hodge Jones & Allen, said: ‘The starting point in all financial provision cases is 50/50 but this is just a “yardstick of equality”, which can shift and be moved in certain circumstances. ‘In this case, the judge made it clear that he would change the percentage division because this was a short marriage, there were no children involved, pre-marital wealth was brought to the marriage by Ms Sharp, and there was no joint approach to finances throughout the marriage. All of [this], the Court of Appeal said, justified the departure from 50/50 provision.’

Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll