The case of Charman returns to Court next week with John Charman arguing that £48 million is too much for his wife. He offered her £20 million and he complains in the Daily Mail that she has given no explanation as to why that is not enough.
He also adds that he stayed with her for the sake of the children, very hurtful for her and them to make such an announcement no doubt and perhaps Mrs Charman’s view is that she deserves more money for remaining married to him for so long.
Their grievance aside, it does seem odd that in such large money cases stellar contribution is not given more consideration. I know many people who work extremely hard and who are very bright but live without the financial success that Mr Charman has enjoyed. His skills are rare, otherwise we’d all be multi millionaires.
The other side of the argument, about giving equal weight to the home maker becomes ridiculous when the earnings rise exponentially. I know some rich Surrey wives who spend their time shopping and beautifying themselves, have a nanny, housekeeper, au pair, gardener and chauffeur have never been to finishing school and could not boil an egg, spend their husband’s money on lavish holidays flirting with other men and yet when they get divorced…
The answer to anyone with assets is don’t get married without a pre-nuptial agreement and get divorced at the first sign of trouble!
Or… emigrate. There is a gap in the market for a survey of the divorce regimes throughout the globe and the most advantageous ones for the seriously rich.