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 principle of equal sharing of all assets in the absence

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll