Our Blogs

In what is widely considered to be a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court last week declared that divorce settlements awarded to two women were unlawful and should be renegotiated as a result of their husbands having hidden the true extent of their wealth at the time they were awarded. Alison Sharland and Varsha Gohil had previously agreed to settlements totalling £10 million and £270,000 respectively but, as a result of the ruling, these figures will now be renegotiated in the High Court. As a result of this precedent, any settlement can be disregarded and renegotiated if it can be proven that the offending party has lied about their wealth to such an extent that that the judge would have made a different order at the time. Many solicitors and legal commentators are claiming that this could lead to a number of claims from spouses who believe that they were short-changed. Ms Sharland, for example, believed that her £10 million award represented half of her husband’s wealth, though it later transpired that he had lied about the value of a company he owned, with the financial press valuing it at £600 million. Ms Sharland has indicated that she was happy with the decision stating: "I hope that their decision sends out a message to everyone going through a divorce. My legal battle has never been about the money, it has always been a matter of principle. I entered into an agreement with my estranged husband thinking that it was a fair one."