Application for Finances Twenty Years After Divorce

The High Court has determined that a former wife who issued an application for financial remedies in excess of £10 million more than two decades after the parties’ divorce is not entitled to any financial provision. Mr Justice Peel held that the application was wholly without merit, observing that the claim came, “to put it mildly, as something of a surprise” to the former husband, given that the parties had lived entirely separate and independent lives and had been out of contact for approximately 12 years.

In LIN v PAR, the court found no evidence of material non-disclosure or undue influence in relation to the parties’ original financial agreement. The judge emphasised that the delay of over 20 years was a “highly relevant” consideration when assessing the fairness of reopening financial claims. The court further rejected the proposition that the former husband - now a businessman with assets valued at approximately £100 million - should bear responsibility for the former wife’s comparatively modest financial position.

Mr Justice Peel stated that the former husband had no involvement in the former wife’s life decisions following the divorce and should not be regarded as “the insurer of last resort” against the consequences of those choices. The court made clear that the mere disparity in wealth between former spouses does not, of itself, justify an award, particularly where the claimed needs do not arise from the marital relationship.

The parties were married for nine years and had no children. Although they previously held a joint interest in a business that had significantly declined in value prior to the divorce, the former husband’s subsequent wealth was generated through independent entrepreneurial activities undertaken after the marriage had ended.

The court found that the former wife had been influenced by a third party, referred to as Mr TP, who approached her in 2022 and subsequently acted as a friend and adviser, encouraging her to seek legal advice. Her solicitors identified that no final financial order had been sealed at the time of divorce, and, with Mr TP’s active encouragement, she issued proceedings asserting that the original agreement should be set aside on grounds of alleged material non-disclosure.

Initial correspondence from her former solicitors sought £10 million to meet interim needs and legal costs, undertakings restraining the former husband from dealing with assets, and full financial disclosure within 14 days. The judge criticised this approach as “thoroughly inappropriate and hostile,” noting that it set an unfortunate tone for the proceedings from the outset.

By the time of trial, following a change of legal representation, the former wife reduced her claim to £2.63 million, comprising contributions towards housing costs of £1.5 million and approximately £340,000 in outstanding debts.

The former husband proposed a “drop-hands” resolution, agreeing not to pursue recovery of his legal costs. The proceedings nevertheless resulted in legal expenses to him of approximately £1.4 million, and he had already paid around £339,000 towards the former wife’s legal fees.

For advice on divorce and financial settlement, please contact Safeena Tufail at s.tufail@hewetts.co.uk

Published on 14/01/2026