The Wife’s needs
72.I now turn to the question of the Wife’s reasonable needs. They fall into two main categories, namely housing and income needs. 73.It is agreed that the Wife needs a property in London. Given the capital available and the standard of living during the marriage, I am quite clear that it should be a house, albeit materially smaller than the former matrimonial home. It should also be in Central London where the parties spent their entire married life. 74.I reject the Husband’s contention that a flat at a cost of less than £3 million is appropriate. Equally, the Wife’s particulars are more expensive than the former matrimonial home on a pound per square foot basis. She may simply have to move slightly further out of Central London but there is no reason why she should not do so. I have decided that an appropriate level for housing for the Wife is £3,500,000 to which I must add stamp duty at £331,250 and costs of purchase/moving at £10,000. 75.I accept that the very small apartment in the French Alps owned, in effect, by the children is not appropriate for the Wife going forward. I have decided that she should have a property to the same value as that owned by the Husband, namely €1,095,000. The total cost, including purchase expenses, will be £1,068,541 as sought by the Wife.76.I have found the issue of a third property more difficult. I entirely accept that the parties had three homes during the marriage and that P House was a substantial property worth £2.75 million when sold. I reject the suggestion that the Wife should have a property costing over €3 million in Cap Ferret on the Bay of Biscay. I cannot ignore the fact that she does have access to the property at Brittany, although it is occupied by her parents. I have decided that it is appropriate for her to have her own holiday home but at the same cost as the property in the French Alps, namely £1,068,541. 77.In terms of pension, it is appropriate that she should have a pension share. After all, a significant proportion of the Husband’s assets are held in pensions. Moreover, it will assist with reducing the tax burden caused by the Life Time Allowance. I have decided that she should have half of the husband’s A Bank Directors’ Pension Scheme. As the CEV is £2,279,490, she will receive £1,139,745. Combined with her own pensions, she will have a pension entitlement of
- JUDGMENT
- The relevant history
- The statements and expert reports
- The assets
- The Open Offers
- Wells
- The Law
- White v White
- K v L
- Miller/McFarlane
- Radmacher
- Kremen v Agrest
- Versteegh v Versteegh
- Z v Z (No 2)
- Brack v Brack
- Brack
- SJ v RA
- Duxbury
- The evidence I heard
- My findings as to the Marriage Contract
- The quantification of the assets
- £ 3,284,021
- The Wife’s needs
- £1,395,541
- Cross-check
- Ms D
- Child periodical payments
- CB v KB
- Conclusion
