McCartney divorce: Lucky Heather Mills?

March 18th, 2008, by marilynstowe No Comments »

  From the Guardian’s commentisfree… blog, 18/03/2008.

Heather Mills may have done well out of her marriage to Paul McCartney. But to get there the couple waged a vicious and unnecessary war

By Marilyn Stowe

Millions of spectators round the world have been following the divorce battle between the McCartneys. It has grabbed media attention like no other case since the divorce of the Prince and Princess of Wales.

It was vicious. It was played out for all it was worth. On the one side: the abhorred but greatly distressed wife, who acts and speaks before she thinks. On the other: a tight-lipped phalanx of the most expensive black-suited lawyers in the country, out for a big win.

And now that it is over, it seems clear to me that there are no winners. Instead, everyone has come away humiliated.

McCartney publicly dumped Heather Mills. He issued proceedings against her based on her “unreasonable behaviour“. Knowing her as well as he did, what did he expect her reaction would be? Deeply wounded, she emerged to fight back in every way she could - and the parties went to war.

If ever there was a way not to conduct a divorce it was this.

Continue reading »

Maintenance, remarriage and “Barder” events

March 7th, 2008, by marilynstowe 2 Comments »

Settle your case on a continuing maintenance basis, and it can come back to haunt you…

For many people, a financial settlement represents the final chapter in a divorce. Generally, it comes to all concerned as a huge relief. Parties can begin to rebuild their lives, putting the unpleasantness of a break-up behind them. For those who achieve a clean break settlement, it will most likely be the end. However, for those who continue to pay or receive maintenance, this is not necessarily the case.

Maintenance may be paid for a period of time, with the court reserving the power to extend that period - or not, as the case may be. Maintenance may cease on cohabitation and will automatically end on the recipient’s remarriage. In other cases, maintenance will have no cut-off date and will only be stopped on the orders of the court, or on the death of the payer or payee.

If one of the parties wishes to bring an open-ended maintenance order to an end, this may occur by mutual consent. Both parties may agree that the time has come for the order to cease, the recipient spouse being able to manage alone.

Solicitors are consulted usually when there is no such agreement, and one party does not want to end or reduce the obligation.

Variations of maintenance orders are expensive and risky. As with the original application for a capital and income award, it involves going through the County Court or Principal Registry in London. The costs will be high - and as a result obtained for either party is likely to be disproportionately expensive. In a straightforward case, it makes sense to negotiate or proceed via the Magistrates Court. This is a simpler and cheaper process. However, when larger sums of money are involved, an experienced Judge will be required to make the determination.

There aren’t any winners in a Maintenance Variation. I don’t recommend it unless it is absolutely necessary, and legal costs are not an issue.

This isn’t all. Continue reading »

Heather Mills minus the divorce lawyer

February 10th, 2008, by marilynstowe 1 Comment »

Will there be blood on the courtroom carpet this week?

As Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills face one another other in court this week, Sir Paul will be flanked by some of the country’s toughest lawyers. Ms. Mills, meanwhile, has elected to represent herself. To my way of thinking, having represented a client in a similar scenario only last week in London’s High Court, to go into court unrepresented is as foolhardy as anyone could ever imagine.

For those unfamiliar with the facilities at the Royal Courts of Justice, let me describe the atmosphere in the sombre courtroom. . Until a final deal is signed and approved by the Court, a fully fought contest could yet take place. Even an agreement reached “in principle” does not guarantee a done deal - and could still break down. Continue reading »

“Tabling” the assets to mutual advantage

January 9th, 2008, by marilynstowe No Comments »

“His wife demanded half of his future income and bonuses. Could he ever achieve closure?” 

“His wife demanded half of his future income and bonuses. Could he ever achieve closure?”

When assets in a medium-term, “big money” marriage are divided, it can be a difficult case to call. If the capital exceeds the reasonable needs of both husband and wife, how should the surplus be allocated?

One client of mine, aged 48, had just sold his business for a net sum of £8 million.   He had inheritances from various family members, totalling £1 million. His pension, which he had no plans to draw down, was worth £1 million on top. A “golden handcuffs” clause in his contract required him to continue to work for the company for the next 5 years on an annual income of £200,000; with bonuses, he expected this to double. He and his wife owned a house worth £2 million, free of mortgage.

Unfortunately, his private life hadn’t been quite so successful. His first wife had left him and gone to live in Australia. Then he fell in love with a married woman who came to work as his PA. Within six months the PA had divorced her husband, and had married my client. Nine years later, this marriage was over too. Now she was demanding half of everything my client had and half his future income - including his bonuses. Was she right? Continue reading »

Room for manoeuvre

November 9th, 2007, by marilynstowe No Comments »

“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 »