Case No. EWFC-136

16.The Wife filed a statement as to the Marriage Contract on 14 September 2021. She said she could not remember any discussions about entering the Contract prior to the decision to marry. Such a Contract was, she said, a necessary stepping-stone to marriage. She added that she was giving a clear and reassuring message that she was not interested in the Husband’s family assets. She claimed that money had caused turmoil in his family. She then said that the parties had pooled their financial resources in accordance with a shared vision that they would be as one. She said she had no legal advice in the run up to signing the contract save for the one appointment at the office of the Notary. She does not recall any discussions about money earned during the marriage being excluded from division on divorce. There was no formal disclosure of either party's resources. She had therefore understood that the Contract just excluded inherited resources. During the marriage, the husband referred to “our” assets. If they were in his name, he had told her this was for tax reasons. They did not mention the Contract to the firm of solicitors, Macfarlanes, when they obtained wealth advice.17.The Husband's statement as to the Marriage Contract was also dated 14 September 2021. He said that they both signed the Contract with full knowledge as to its ramifications. It represented their family values and who they wanted to be. They both fully intended to be bound. Cascading family wealth to future generations was very important to both of them. They did not need to sign a marriage contract to achieve this as it would occur in any event under the default regime in France. The reason they signed was due to a mutual desire to maintain their financial independence. There were several discussions. He accepts there was no separate legal advice but said that the Notary was under a duty to advise both parties as to the legal implications. Separate legal advice is unusual in France. The instructions to the Notary came from the Wife and her family to prepare a “separation de biens” contract. The meeting lasted one hour. The Notary fully explained the legal consequences and ensured they understood. The Wife would never sign without understanding the implications. She is an intelligent and sophisticated business woman. The Wife employed the contract to her advantage. They are a very French family. The contract would be upheld in France. Throughout the marriage, they have kept their finances separate other than the two properties in England that they both contributed to fully. Other properties and assets were separate. The French Alps apartment was paid for by the Husband's finances save for a €30,000 loan from the Wife. This was subsequently repaid through renovations to her apartment in the same block. Their English wills only dealt with their English assets which were in joint names anyway. The remaining assets were never treated as “ours”.18.Turning to the issue of tax, CMS produced a report dated 2 November 2021. It says that the husband's resources in Guernsey, amounting to approximately €5.3 million would be subject to United Kingdom income tax/capital gains tax if remitted to this jurisdiction. Following questions from the parties, CMS reported again on 26 January 2022. The money would not be subject to tax if paid to the Wife offshore. The Wife can then remit the money to this jurisdiction without tax consequences after Decree Absolute has been pronounced, as she would no longer be a connected person to the Husband. There would be a risk of a tax charge to the Husband if the money was then used to benefit a relevant person, which would include the children.19.The pension report of Mathieson Consulting is dated 26 July 2022. It makes the point that there is no Lifetime Tax Allowance (“LTA”) protection in relation to the pensions even though they are in excess of the LTA maximum. As I understand it, this does mean that a pension sharing order in this case could be beneficial to both parties in relation to tax. Mr Mathieson calculates that the Wife would require between 54.5% and 56.4% of the Husband’s A Bank Directors Pension scheme to achieve equality of income at different ages. This would give the parties £49,000 each gross per annum at the age of 60. The sum would increase to £61,000 gross each at 65. The Wife will then herself have a LTA liability as she too will be in excess of the maximum. The parties could apply for 2016 Act protection if the Husband has made no contributions to the pensions since 2016. In such circumstances, the LTA would increase from £1,073,000 to £1.25 million. In oral evidence, the Husband thought that he had made contributions in 2016 but not since. It was therefore unclear if he could take advantage of this protection.20.Both parties filed section 25 statements. The Wife’s statement is dated 5 August 2022. She says that the parties had a true, loving, equal partnership. She had supported the Husband financially whilst he studied at INSEAD. After the marriage, she became Head of Marketing for C Group. In 2003, she became Marketing Director. At times, she did have to reduce her working days to three days per week due to her commitments to the children. She says there was never any doubt the fruits of the marriage would be joint and equal. She ceased employment with SCo on 31 December 2021. She received £529,437 on 24 June 2022, although there will be tax to pay of £71,063. She has significant industry experience in water. She would like to go back into business as an entrepreneur involved in water purification/filtration. In terms of her needs, she seeks 3 properties, namely a home in London, a ski apartment in the French Alps, and a home holiday home in South West France. She put her total capital need in this statement as being between £8 and £9 million. Her budget is £300,000 per annum, although she has subsequently reduced that to £200,000 per annum.21.The Husband’s section 25 statement is dated 5 August 2022. He sets out his current position at B Bank and makes the point that his income is dependent on the fees he can generate from his twenty large clients. He says he has had no similar success since the Mergers and Acquisition deal that he undertook in 2020/2021. Overall, his fees have been down 60% this year whereas the bank's fees have been down 40%. At present, he believes he is generating about $4 million per annum for the bank, on which basis he could not expect $3 million per annum income. He makes the point that he expects that he will be asked to leave the bank in due course. If so, he would like to be appointed to some non-executive directorships but, if he was to do so, it would be likely that he would lose his unvested shares with B Bank as he would be deemed to be in competition with them. At present, he expects his income to be between £500,000 and £800,000 per annum net of tax. If he retired, he would hope to achieve approximately £100,000 per annum from non-executive directorships and he was considering setting up a boutique advisory business. He then suggested, to my surprise, that his Wife's earning capacity is greater than this at between £150,000 and £180,000 per annum gross. He sets out his case as to post-separation endeavour and the various monies that he has inherited, including €602,122 from his father's estate. It is accepted that this sum should be ignored as non-matrimonial. He talks about money he has recently invested in various entities such as NCap. He claims that investments such as his interest in CCap should be reduced significantly for delay in receipt and other illiquidity matters. Indeed, he seeks to include future capital calls on these investments as hard liabilities. His case as to housing is that both parties can buy in London for around £2.8 million. A skiing apartment for the Wife should have a value around the same as his French Alps apartment namely €1,000,000. In relation to a holiday home, he reminds me that the Wife has, in the past, stayed at her parents’ home in Brittany. He says that the last budget of the family as a unit that was prepared in the early part of 2020 was £265,452 per annum. He is concerned that, if he pays capital to the wife offshore and she then remits it to this country, but then uses it for the children, he could have to pay 45% in tax. He therefore seeks that the amount of tax is held in an escrow account.22.Both parties filed statements in reply. The Wife’s statement is dated 24 August 2022. She says that the Husband is so financially aware that he will not lose his B Bank unvested shares or see his financial world collapse. She believes he will move to Paris. Her parents’ home is their primary base and too small for the family. The family budget that the Husband referred to covered basic household costs only. The Husband’s statement in reply is also dated 24 August 2022. He has moved to rented accommodation in SW7. He makes the point that the Wife has increased her property needs dramatically since her Form E. He says he will continue to live in London.23.On 15 August 2022, the sale of the former matrimonial home completed at £4.6 million. The property was mortgage free. The net equity was £4,536,326. The sale of P House completed on 15 September 2022 in the sum of £2.75 million. The net sale proceeds amounted to £2,719,752.