£3.5m payout is ‘not enough’ for ex-wife Divorcee demands more of former husband’s wealth
ADIVORCEE handed a £3.5 million chunk of her former husband’s £10 million fortune has demanded more – claiming her payout was “her worst case scenario”.
Karen Hart, 61, said she should have received at least a £5 million half share after the end of her 20-year marriage to property mogul John Hart, 82, in 2011.
The couple had two children and lived in a £1.1 million fivebedroom gated residence at Wishaw, near Sutton Coldfield, with holiday homes in Miami and Spain.
But Mrs Hart challenged a 2015 legal decision that saw their assets split unequally after a court heard Mr Hart was already wealthy and had put £2.6 million into the marriage.
The Court of Appeal heard the couple began living together in 1983, when she was 34 and he was 55, and married in 1987.
They enjoyed a “lavish lifestyle” together with “lavish expenditure” and their palatial home boasted a gym, home cinema room, a separate guest annexe and garaging for five cars.
But their split has already led to one Appeal Court case, when Mr Hart failed in a bid to have her £3.5 million settlement cut as she had a new boyfriend.
Peter Mitchell, for Mrs Hart, told the court that, far from being too much, that payout “was, as it transpired the worst possible result for her.”
“It was a result which was unfair and discriminatory,” he told the court. The resolution of the case on needs was the worst possible outcome for Mrs Hart.
“Marriage is a partnership of equals and, if you build up a pot together, you should share equally in that pot.
“It was the worst possible result, which precluded any sharing.”
Grant Armstrong, for Mr Hart, described the fortune he brought to the marriage 30 years ago as an “elephant in the room” and compared his ex- wife’s financial position time to “a mouse”.
Of the 2015 settlement, he said: “The judge came to a ball park figure. The wife herself said he was a man who was very wealthy at the time of the marriage, and had the vehicles, the yachts, the properties in Spain and Miami, the trappings of wealth.
“Mr Hart was coming into this marriage as a man in his 50s, after a lifetime of working in business and having considerable property assets. This was not a case where a couple grew their assets together.
“She has a home, a holiday home, a lifetime income at a very considerable figure and is clear of liabilities. It is a very generous determination of her needs.
Lord Justice Beatson reserved his decision on the case, to be delivered at a later date.
She has a home, a holiday home, a lifetime income ... It is a very generous determination of her needs
at the
Grant Armstrong