Case No. FD19F00071
Family Court

Case No. FD19F00071

Fecha: 04-Feb-2021

The History in more detail

9.H has made his career in construction and property development. He was living in Moscow, having originated from what is now Ukraine, by the time he and W met in St Petersburg, where she lived. He was by then financially successful and in 2006 had sold his shares in a company developing a residential complex for in excess of $20m. This was just one of a number of enterprises in which he was involved but much the most financially remunerative. 10.In April 2008, when the parties met, H was working as Deputy Head of National Projects in Moscow. That position did not inhibit him from being involved in his own private enterprises. W was working as manager of a fashion retail company in St Petersburg. 11.The couple very quickly fell in love and in late 2008 H rented a larger and smarter flat in St Petersburg for W to move into, paid her rent, provided her with a large allowance and paid S’s nursery and then school fees. W has calculated that the benefits that she was at that time receiving from H amounted to $20-25k pm. From then on W has been financially dependent upon H. 12.In mid 2009 the parties agreed that W would sever her ties with St Petersburg and move with S to live with H in Moscow. On a date unspecified in the second half of 2009 the parties became engaged to marry. 13.By the end of 2009 the parties had agreed to move to London. Neither party had any connection with England nor spoke the language. W had no assets of her own of any significance and the motive was plainly financial in order to best protect H’s wealth. In January 2010 the family visited London and they arranged through Coutts Bank that W would obtain a UK Tier 1 investor visa. She named H and S as her dependents. The arrangement was done in this way as it would have been difficult for H, who was then working for government in an important role in construction and reconstruction, to be seen to be making such an application. H instructed his lawyer to draw up a loan agreement which he then required W to sign for the £1m that he provided to W to obtain the visa. She had no legal advice at the time and did as H asked. At that stage the parties were still only engaged rather than married. 14.In August 2010 the parties married in St Petersburg and bought a flat in London NW8. It cost £2.95m and the 10% deposit was paid in equal shares, W’s portion coming from the £1m provided by H for the investor visa. On purchase they moved into the property and W and S have lived in London ever since that time. 15.In November 2010 H entered into a Principal Party Agreement (PPA) with a trust company (which I abbreviate to “U”) giving U control over 16 of H’s companies. This was one of a number of documents which I shall examine in more detail later in this judgment. Another raft of very important documents were entered into in July 2011. The trust acted as director of a private Foundation (“the Foundation”) at the request of H and which was used to make monies available to H. 16.H’s business life continued in Russia in both the public sphere and as a private developer. Companies with which he was connected engaged in both private developments and obtained Russian government contracts for construction projects. 17.In February 2012 H entered into the first of a series of loan agreements with a BVI company “MI” whereby funds held within the Foundation were made available to H by way of loan. It is H’s case that he has to date borrowed a little over £13.5m in various tranches against a loan facility of £15m. Although all these loans have repayment dates, many of which have passed, H accepts that it is highly unlikely that any of the loans will be called in during his lifetime. 18.Loans were used to purchase a property in Cyprus in 2012 in the name of a Foundation company for €730k and a property in Majorca in the name of another such company later in the same year for €3.05m. 19.The assets held within the Foundation were enlarged from time to time as other entities were placed under that umbrella and as projects carried out by companies were brought to a conclusion and money returned to the Foundation and reinvested. It was thus that the second matrimonial home in The Bishops Avenue, London was purchased in 2013 in joint names for £8.65m, the whole of the purchase price (£9.2m inclusive of SDLT and other expenses) being produced in tranches by way of loans from the Foundation, save for the last £1.7m which came from a private development carried out by H with Foundation funds. 20.In January 2013 the shares in one of the Foundation companies were transferred to W to enable her to take out a lease through the company for premises off Harley Street from which W could set up a medical beautician business called LMS. H invested heavily in the business, including by way of a loan to W in the sum of £200k. 21.In early 2014 H fell out with the Russian government and had to leave Russia at short notice. He was threatened with criminal charges and lost much of his remaining Russian assets. The rift was later partially healed but for a period H was under significant financial strain. 22.On 1 April 2014 H, W and S were in Majorca for H’s 50th birthday and H and W had an argument. For reasons that I will come on to, I am satisfied that this date did not mark the end of the marital partnership. H asserts that from this time on, the relationship between him and W was purely as friends. 23.At the end of 2014 the first matrimonial home was sold and the net proceeds of sale were split so that each party received £757k. 24.In early 2015 W incorporated MM, a high-end fashion retailer. Within a couple of months she transferred her shareholding to her sister. She said that it was always her intention that the business should be transferred to her sister as it was a method to give her the right of free movement under the Schengen Agreement. H invested €100k into the project. 25.Whenever the date of separation, W has remained in the matrimonial home with S. S is in her last year at school and will then move on to an English university, having already received a number of offers. H continues to spend the majority of his time in Russia but spends some time in England where he has rented a flat.