Settle your differences – divorcing could cost you £1.25m
Judge’s advice to couple
A RUSSIAN beauty queen and her lawyer husband have been told to settle their differences out of court by a senior judge – as their divorce case is set to cost £1.25million.
Former Miss World, ekaterina Parfenova, 42, and her husband Richard Fields, 59, have already racked up £1million in legal bills in a dispute over money.
And they were due to spend another £250,000 on a ten-day trial, in which she was to battle for a share of Mr Field’s £6million fortune.
Although the pair, who married in 2002 and have two young children, were granted a divorce in March 2013 it has never been made absolute because of their legal battle.
But yesterday top divorce court judge Mr Justice holman said the couple had been married long enough to settle their differences amicably, as he warned the cost of the trial would escalate to £1.25m.
To carry on would be like taking part in a ‘boxing match’, he told the Family Division of the high Court in London.
The judge – one of the most senior family court judges in england – said it filled him with ‘gloom’ to see the wealthy couple bickering in court when they should be sitting round a table negotiating a fair settlement.
And he later made a passionate appeal for all divorce cases to be held in public to bolster confidence in how such cases are handled.
he said: ‘It’s awful. Don’t you think it’s awful? It’s like a boxing match. You and Mr Fields were married to each other for ten years roughly ... It really doesn’t have to be like this. It should never have got this far.
‘ Think about what each of you could have done with a million pounds. You should not be going on like this. Frankly, it is very, very unedifying.’
he added the pair should avoid the ‘awful, painful destructive experience’ of having to give evidence against each other in open court.
As well as a share of the family assets, Mrs Parfenova Fields wants maintenance from Mr Field’s yearly income of $2million (£1.28million) from his American litigation company.
She told the court she felt ‘cheated’ when he previously closed down a company in which she owned 22.5 per cent of the shares, before going on to set up an identical company where he owned all the shares.
The judge had previously denied a request from Stephen Trowell, QC for Mr Fields, for a private hearing. he said he would only sit in private if pricesensitive information was discussed.
his comments came around 18 months after Sir James Munby, the president of the Family Division of the high Court, called for more transparency in the family justice system.
Mr Justice holman said: ‘There is a very long tradition in this country of open justice. We sit in the name of the sovereign but on behalf of the public. how can people have any confidence in the way the system is being operated if they are excluded?’
Most family cases have private hearings. Journalists can attend but reporting restrictions often apply. The hearing continues.
‘It’s awful. It’s like a boxing match’