The High Court has settled a dispute relating to how much of a couple’s assets should be considered matrimonial and how much should be excluded during divorce proceedings. 

The case involved a couple who ran a hotel business together. 

The husband was 49 and the wife was 56. They had been married for 17 years and had three children in their late teens. 

Most of the couple’s wealth came from the husband’s pre-marital assets, together with contributions to the business from his family totalling £4.1million during the marriage. 

Their total assets including pensions at the time of the divorce were £22.4million. 

The court assessed that £10million should be classed as non-matrimonial and so be excluded from the divorce settlement. 

Under the general sharing principle, this meant the wife should receive half the remaining matrimonial assets, approximately £6.4million. However, that was not enough to meet her needs. 

She needed £3.2million for housing, and a capitalised income of £4.5million. 

The wife was therefore awarded a total of £7.7million. 

The husband was ordered to pay child maintenance and school fees. 

Mr Justice Peel said: “In reaching these conclusions, I also bear in mind the length of the marriage, the full contributions made by the parties during the marriage, and the fact that the wife applied much of her own pre-marital wealth to the family economy.”