A piece in today’s Times:
An accountant who was awarded nearly £10 million in a divorce settlement has asked Court of Appeal judges to give her a share of the money her former husband earns in the years ahead. [J4MB: Because nearly £10 million isn’t enough for a woman.]
Kim Waggott, 49, has argued that she is entitled to a share of the post-separation wealth of William Waggott, 54, because she supported him early in his career.
Mr Waggott, who is chief financial officer at the travel company TUI — formerly Thomson — said that Mrs Waggott’s claim should be rejected.
Sir James Munby, Lord Justice Moylan and Mr Justice MacDonald are analysing the dispute at a Court of Appeal hearing in London. Lawyers say the issue of post-separation payments is “vexed” and suggest that the decision will have implications. A family court judge ruled on the division of money in 2016 but Mrs Waggott is challenging the decision. Mr Waggott’s lawyers argued that the original judge was right — “in law and in overall fairness” — to reject Mrs Waggott’s claim to a share in “future bonuses” he will earn.
The appeal judges have been told that Mr and Mrs Waggott, who have a teenage daughter and lived in Buckinghamshire before they separated, met in 1990 and married in 2000.
In 2011, Mrs Waggott learnt that her husband was having an affair with a colleague. That affair ended but the following year Mr Waggott was found to be having another extramarital relationship. He moved out of the family home and now lives in Hertfordshire with another woman, the judges were told.
Mrs Waggott’s lawyers have argued that Mr Waggott would not be in a position to earn his “massive post-separation income” had it not been for the support of his wife earlier in his career.
“Considerations of fairness . . . require that a wife in her position, who has supported her husband through the earlier stages of his career, during a 21-year relationship, should be entitled to a share of the post-separation fruits of that career,” James Turner, QC, said.
Nigel Dyer, QC, for Mr Waggott, said: “Once the marital assets have been shared and needs have been met, there is no justification for further sharing in the fruits of the post-separation endeavour of one party.”
The hearing continues.
You can subscribe to The Times here.
