Call for divorce clarity

Family practitioners have been thrown into confusion over how assets should be divided in divorce cases, following a ruling by the Court of Appeal this week.The decision in Cowan v Cowan, which involved assets worth 11.5 million, was seen as a test of the ambiguous House of Lords decision last year in White v White, which caused uncertainty over whether wives should be given half of all assets in big-money cases.Mrs Cowan, who was originally awarded a 1.7 million lump sum and the matrimonial home worth 1.1 million by the High Court, argued that White set a precedent for splitting assets on a 50-50 basis.

But the Court of Appeal upped her award to 4.4 million 38% of the total.

The court admitted more consistency is needed, but refused to lay down rules because they would be too legion and too varied to permit listing or clarification.Mrs Cowans solicitor Stuart Jacobs, senior partner of London firm Lucas Baron Jacobs, said the case indicated how difficult it is when you try to apply White to real-life situations, and called for statutory clarification.Rosemary Carter, chairwoman of the Solicitors Family Law Association, said the decision mirrored the post-White trend which has seen wives getting between 38% and 40% of the assets.

But she also called for more guidance, highlighting in particular the courts reference to Mrs Cowans extraordinary contribution to the couples business.What will now happen if there is no extraordinary contribution? she asked.

This decision has left the law in some disorder.Peter Watson-Lee, chairman of the Law Societys family law committee, complained there was also uncertainty about the impact of the decision on day-to-day cases.He said: The problem is not knowing how far all this will cascade down, as not everyone can afford to take their cases to the Court of Appeal.

What most practitioners need is guidance on things like pensions-sharing which, if they are now to be based on percentages, will all be a bit airy-fairy.Paula Rohan