“The client walked away with millions - and I used the case as the basis for a storyline in The Archers.”

The hardest cases - the tricky, nerve-wracking ones that need a bit of brain power - are always the most interesting. I like to play “intellectual chess”! One such case was when a client’s husband told her, out of the blue, that he was leaving. He complained that he was fed up with her spending, and claimed she was “sending him bankrupt’”. He refused to give her his new address, but told her to contact him at his business. She suspected that he was having an affair with her (newly divorced) best friend.

This couple enjoyed a lavish lifestyle. At their swish, £3 million home, they employed a groom, a gardener, and domestic help. The wife kept ponies in a paddock and stables, and the home also had a swimming pool and tennis court. There were no children. The wife, a former model, now passed her time horse riding. The husband liked to play golf and was often seen in the company of her best friend, who was also a keen golfer.

In “Big Money” cases, as with others, assets are identified, valued and divided up. In this instance, because the couple had been as poor as church mice when they had wed and their wealth had been built up during the marriage, a straightforward 50/50 split looked to be in order. When the husband’s solicitors wrote to me, however, it became clear that he loathed his wife.

The husband gave a different version of events. He insisted that his wife’s incessant spending had brought him to the brink of bankruptcy. His company was failing. The house was fully mortgaged, save for about £300,000. There were no savings. Around £50,000 had been run up on credit cards. There were no pension arrangements, as income had been swallowed up by his wife’s profligate expenditure. He had a decreasing income of £100,000 gross per annum. He offered his wife yearly maintenance of £40,000 - although he said that he was unable to guarantee this sum in the long term - plus the sum of £200,000 towards a house. His solicitors warned that if she did not accept his “generous” offer, he would take her to court and make her pay the costs. The parties had very different stories. Which of them was telling the truth?

Continue reading »

A client came to see me for the first time, accompanied by her mother.The client was attractive, well-groomed and smartly-dressed. Her mother, meanwhile, looked drawn and tired.Mrs X began by saying she felt hot. Could she please remove her jacket and her cardigan? It wasn’t hot at all but my trainee, who was there to take notes, helped her remove them. It didn’t do the trick. The client was perspiring profusely, but this isn’t unusual for those who are stressed about seeing a solicitor for the first time.My client then asked if I would mind if she removed her wig. I hadn’t realised she was wearing one. So with me sitting there, beginning to wonder what this was all about, the client took off her wig and placed it in her bag. She sat through the interview, completely bald, and began to tell me about her cancer. It had been diagnosed at a late stage, she had a life expectancy of about 20 months at most, and she had come to discuss her children’s future.

Mrs X was 38. She had two children, aged eight and six. When he had learned about her cancer, her husband had left her. He had been unable to face her illness, and for many months had been having an affair. He had told her that she could have whatever she wanted from him and that his affair “wasn’t serious”. He simply couldn’t cope. Her concern was not so much about a divorce, as for the children and what would happen to them. She wanted her mother to care for them following her death. She spoke of accepting her terminal cancer but said that without her husband, it felt difficult and pointless to continue to fight.

Continue reading »

“Will my client ever forgive her? It is unlikely.”

Some years ago, a client came to see me about his wife. He was a consultant at a hospital. She was a medical researcher at a university. According to him, their sex life was good and there had been no signs of any problems. Then one day, like a bolt from the blue, the wife announced that their marriage had gone stale - and that she wished to “move on”.

The couple had attended two counselling sessions, but these had failed to throw any light upon his wife’s decision. She denied that a third party was involved, and my client was adamant that she was telling the truth. The couple both worked extremely long hours, and shared the care of their children with a live-in nanny. The nanny had been with the family since the birth of their youngest child eight years previously.

I asked him about his wife’s work pattern. He told me that she travelled fairly frequently; sometimes, when he was working nights or weekends, they passed “like ships in the night”. They had both agreed that children would not adversely affect their careers, but he had made considerable sacrifices. He had declined lucrative private work, to better assist with the childcare arrangements. He felt such sacrifices keenly and described how his wife had spent the previous evening with a “girl friend” at a pop concert, while he had stayed at home to babysit.

From a legal perspective, the case seemed relatively straightforward. I advised him that there was no reason why a shared childcare arrangement could not continue as before, but from two homes. I did point out that if the nanny went to live with the mother, it was likely that the children would spend more time away from their father.

The finances could also be split equally, as both husband and wife earned similar incomes and were likely to reside in similar properties. The couple’s pension arrangements were slightly imbalanced in pension in the husband’s favour, but this was unlikely to make any significant difference. Both parties had healthy parents, so inheritance prospects were not relevant. My client would probably have to pay agreed child support and contribute equally to school fees.

On the face of it, there were no major problems.  However, my client hadn’t listened to a word. He explained that he had come to see me because, as a woman, I might be able to make some sense of what had happened to turn his life upside down.

I asked him if, when he made diagnoses, he ever gave his opinion without being absolutely certain. When he admitted that this was frequently the case, I told him that I suspected his wife had begun an affair. I advised him to go home and ask her again, because the cost of false hope was tormenting him. His wife needed to tell him the truth, to put him out of his misery.

A few days later he telephoned to arrange another appointment. I had been right: another person was involved. His wife was conducting an affair with a work colleague - another woman.

Continue reading »

When Heather Mills made a spectacle out of herself on worldwide television recently, I found it difficult to sympathise with her. Quite simply, she was out of control: “on a frolic of her own”, as lawyers are wont to say. She has become mired in a mixture of self-pity, anger, self-righteousness and the injustice of an imagined nightmare endured in front of the world. Aligning herself with the McCann family and the late Princess of Wales, she seemed to be saying to us: “You have pity on them - have pity on me”.

 Ms Mills is playing out her role as abandoned wife for all she is worth. She has her side of the story to tell, and I have no doubt at all that she believes every word she says. She has been lambasted in the media, but her efforts are producing results: the image of Sir Paul, a national treasure, has now been tarnished.

I think she intends to continue - and make a fortune into the bargain. From a legal perspective, however, Heather Mills is pushing her luck to the limit. She is not supposed to discuss her marriage until the case is over. In all probability, speaking out has already cost her a small fortune in her settlement.

Last year, in an article written for The Times, I suggested that Sir Paul should pay up generously and fast, to gag his errant wife for his own sake and for that of his family. Sadly, this never happened; the damage has been done and is likely to worsen. Will Sir Paul be able to stop her- permanently - in the court battle to come? Last year I might have said no, but her uncontrolled display has led me to reconsider this prospect.

Undoubtedly, Ms Mills has the right to freedom of expression. However, under Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950, Sir Paul and his family from his first marriage have a right to a private life too. Under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, they also have the right to protection from harassment. Therefore they can ask the court to make a permanent injunction, to stop Ms Mills washing the family’s dirty laundry in public.

Continue reading »

It seems that the increased divorce rate amongst over-50s is a hot topic right now. Following my appearance in The Times at the beginning of this month, the Daily Mail has interviewed me for its own story on the subject. It was published on Friday 9 November.

Rise of the Saga divorce: More over-50s go it alone once children leave home

Their children have grown up. Their mortgage is paid off. And they are looking forward to a long and happy retirement - apart.

This is increasingly the experience of Britain’s over-50s, with the number of divorced couples in that age group rising relentlessly despite the overall divorce rate dropping to its lowest level for nearly three decades.

Last year in England and Wales 54,034 over-50s divorced, compared with 47,763 in 2001.

The latest figures show that there are more than two million divorced people in the 50-plus age bracket.

In a phenomenon known as “Saga divorce”, experts believe couples who have stayed together for the sake of their children reassess their own futures when their offspring have flown the nest.

Rising numbers want a new start and feel the stigma attached to divorce has diminished.

Continue reading »

“In a year or two when their emotions have cleared, they may bitterly regret settling too fast and too expensively.”

Sometimes I read in the press that family lawyers can inflame and prolong the divorce process. Perhaps some do. My own clients know from the outset what will happen in their own cases, because my years of experience mean that I can advise my clients fearlessly and predict the likely outcomes with confidence.

Along the way, I have encountered a number of clients who have wished to negotiate directly with their spouses. I don’t have a problem with this - provided that negotiations are not rushed, take place on an equal footing and both parties are fully informed about assets.

Sadly, it is a fact of life that some people will try to take advantage of vulnerable partners.

Continue reading »

“If you had the opportunity, would you?”

A smart, attractive lady in her mid 40s came to see me recently. She is a lawyer by profession. Our meeting began very calmly and her problem soon became clear.

She is married to a chartered accountant. He is a partner in a multinational firm. They have three children, aged between eight and 14. They enjoy an affluent lifestyle. They have no particular worries and life proceeds smoothly.  On the surface, all is well and they are the perfect family.

She certainly hadn’t been looking for romance outside her marriage. Unfortunately, it arrived in the guise of an old university friend.

He is the MD of a successful family business. They hadn’t met for 20 years, but bumped into one another on opposite sides of a commercial transaction. He has a family, but has long since divorced his own wife. They “clicked” and have now embarked on a passionate affair.

Her husband has noticed she has become withdrawn and is worried about her. However, he suspects nothing. Listening to her, I was reminded of the film Unfaithful, which starred Richard Gere and Diane Lane as a “perfect” couple torn apart by the wife’s affair.

This lady wanted advice on the likely outcome of a divorce. When I asked how she thought divorce would impact upon her family, she burst into tears and her control slipped. All her guilt came tumbling out, and she said it was a relief to cry. She used up a lot of the tissues I keep in my desk. She said quite simply that it would devastate them all.

Continue reading »

I was interviewed for a feature in The Times, which was published on Saturday 3 November:

Divorce rates are falling - except for people over 60. What is the fallout when Granny and Grandpa split up, asks Celia Dodd

Nowadays, few people raise an eyebrow at the news that another young friend or relative is heading for the divorce courts. But what happens when couples divorce later in life? What makes couples who have rubbed along together for decades mess with the status quo so late in the day? The unpalatable stereotype of the grey-haired man trading in his wife for a younger model undoubtedly still exists, but there is a new desire around for fulfilment in later life, and women in particular have the get-up-and-go as well as the economic freedom to do something about it. Could we be entering the age of the silver divorce?

The latest set of statistics show a continued rise in divorce among the over60s age group; a trend that started in 1998. This is in marked contrast to the 22-year low in annual divorce numbers for the rest of the population. Divorce among the Saga generation may be on the rise because people in their fifties and sixties are looking forward to a longer and healthier retirement than their parents, and feel less inclined to settle for second best.

The emotional fallout when older couples separate has a knock-on effect down the generations: it divides loyalties and even splits families. For the person who has been abandoned, it’s a bitter blow at the cruellest time of life, when all the props that help younger couples to get through have taken a back seat.

“Divorce is almost worse than bereavement“

A leading divorce lawyer Marilyn Stowe, of Stowe Family Law, says: “With older clients divorce is almost worse than a bereavement because your spouse of 30-odd years is still around, enjoying retirement, but not with you. Adult children almost invariably side with the person who has been deserted, and the grandchildren will follow their parents and, as a result, the relationship between grandchild and grandparent can be ruptured.

“I think there is an increased possibility of hostility when the children are grown-up because it’s easy for them to make black-and-white moral judgments. And I think the idea that their inheritance might go to a stranger is at the back of some adult children’s minds.”

Continue reading »

Are clients really prepared to tolerate service like this?

Recently I have had to instruct solicitors to act for me - not in a divorce but on a matter that has been deeply upsetting and has caused me real concern. For the first time in nearly 30 years I have found out what it’s like to be on the other side of the desk. It isn’t a pleasant experience!

First of all there is the lack of control. I had to travel a long way to see my new lawyer and, as with many of my own clients, this experience removed me from my comfort zone. Instead of advising, I was being advised. Was he giving good or bad advice? I didn’t know. Certainly, it would cost me a small fortune if I lost. So much depended on that lawyer’s skill and the trust I had placed in him.

The opulence of his offices only made me more fretful. When I walked through the door and noticed the firm’s uniformed concierges and stainless steel glass lifts, I saw that the place was steeped in affluence. I wondered how much of this I would be paying for - a concern that was exacerbated an hour into my appointment when the lawyer, clearly wanting to get away for lunch, began glancing at his watch. Continue reading »