The Fair Assessment of Pre-Acquired Wealth and the Responsibility for Costs: N v F

Ashley Murray

Barrister Oriel Chambers Liverpool

In N v F (Financial Orders: Pre-Acquired Wealth) [2011] EWHC 586 (Fam) [2011] 2 FLR (forthcoming) the parties' marriage had lasted 16 years and there were two children (15 and 8). On marriage the husband was worth £2.116m. On divorce the parties' entire assets including the husband's pre-marital assets amounted in net value to £9.714m. The central issue was the way the pre-marital wealth should be treated.

The husband (aged 58) contended that in the light of his pre-marital worth which if uprated for inflation to the date of trial could be increased from the £2.116m to £3.4m or if uprated with an allowance for some passive growth then to £4.2m (para [2]) this was a case where it would be fair for the wife to receive less than equality by a division of the available capital worth which represented to her some 43% or £4.17m of the total: a sum which he also submitted met her reasonable needs (para [3]).

Read the full article here.