Report comment

I know this is an unpopular view, but I disagree with the contention as set out above that the presumption should always be in favour of a 50/50 split. Often, women (and increasingly men) marry up and coming or established wealthy types knowing that in the event of divorce, as long as there are kids involved, they are made for life. I think the courts need to be more discerning in determining the value of the contribution and not simply defaulting to 50%. I certainly agree with the judge's recognition of special contribution by the husband in this case, and if that means London loses its place as divorce capital for wives so be it.