Millionaire ‘is not responsible for daughter after divorce’

DAUGHTERS do not become their father’s responsibility again once they get divorced, the Court of Appeal has ruled, as it granted a woman an additional payout.

Hayat Alireza, 38, was given £2million when she first split from her City banker husband Hossam Radwan, 46, but asked for an extra £5.5million to buy a home fit for her and their three children to live in.

Her claim was rejected in August 2016 by Family Division Judge Mrs Justice Roberts because she is expected to inherit £100million when her multimillionaire father dies.

However, that decision has now been overturned by the appeals court.

Lady Justice King, sitting with Lady Justice Gloster and Lord Justice Lewison, said it was “hard to see” where you had a husband with millions in assets and an earning capacity of £350,000 that: “It can be right to conclude that his wife of 14 years, with no earning capacity and three children to care for, one of whom has special needs, should be denied a capital settlement sufficient to allow her to buy a property outright in her own name.”

She said Mrs Justice Roberts “made an order which denied this wife any recognition in the form of a capital settlement to reflect her contribution to the marriage”.

She added that, taking everything into account, it exposed a “fallacy” that “the wife only needs a roof over her head until the father dies”.

Robert Peel, Ms Alireza’s QC, had argued that it was “unfair” that her elderly father should be expected to look after her. “The judge is placing on the wife’s father an obligation to ensure the wife is provided for,” he said.

“There is no principle of law that a wife should become the responsibility of her birth family upon divorce.”

The appeals court judges agreed to send the case back to the High Court for a reasonable figure to be reached to allow Ms Alireza to buy a home for herself and her children.