£3.4m
. In reaching that figure I also bear in mind that £3m was the price of the previous matrimonial home. 133.Both H and W put forward budgets for themselves at around £250k pa, in W’s case reduced from an eye-watering sum originally sought of over £860k pa. H makes the fair point that he is paying not only for a rented flat in London but also for half the cost of the matrimonial home (which has a very expensive service charge of around £50k pa) and support for one ex-wife and one daughter. I accept H’s evidence that the amount that he spends on himself is relatively modest. 134.I bear in mind that this is not a long marriage and that W did not bring money in to the marriage. The standard of living was very high but this cannot be allowed to predominate over other factors. H accepted S as a child of the family but she will leave school in 6 months’ time. 135.W is aged only 51. However, I cannot find that she has a significant earning capacity. She came to England at H’s instance. She gave up her job in Russia. Her English is heavily accented and she is plainly not confident in the use of the language. She used an interpreter throughout her evidence although she understood a certain amount of what was said in English and corrected the interpreter on several occasions. 136.She would not easily find a job in England and nor would it be appropriate for me to find that she will or should return to Russia. If she does obtain a job it is most likely to be working in some high-end Russian retail outfit but I would anticipate that the competition for such jobs would be very high. I cannot do otherwise than to say that if she wishes to live at a higher level than that which my budget permits it will be up to her to find a way of doing so. But, my award must be sufficient to meet what I deem her reasonable needs to be on a lifelong basis without making the assumption that she can so contribute. 137.Weighing everything up I reach the conclusion that I should take her needs as requiring receipt of £100k pa which produces a capital sum on Duxbury tables of
- The Honourable Mr Justice Cohen :
- The History in more detail
- When did the marriage end?
- Legal proceedings
- The purpose of Part III
- which was the alleviation of the adverse consequences of no, or no adequate, financial provision being made by a foreign court in a situation where there were substantial connections with England
- Where the English connections of the case are very strong there may be no reason why the application should not be treated as if it were made in purely English proceedings
- H’s business activities
- The move to London
- The Foundation
- my death or physical or mental incapacity
- strictly speaking
- The German venture
- Russian projects
- W’s use of resources
- The assets of the parties
- £5.14m [£2.57m each]
- £95k
- [£2.57m
- £687k
- £3.087m
- W’s needs
- £3.4m
- £2.06m
- £320k
- Conduct of the litigation
