davieG Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 Kathleen Wyatt has been told the £1.9m payout she hoped to secure from Dale Vince is "out of the question"Continue reading the main story Related Stories Post-divorce payout ruling due Millionaire's ex-wife told 'get job' Tycoon wins ex-wife maintenance case A woman has won a landmark Supreme Court bid to claim cash from her millionaire ex-husband 20 years after they divorced.Kathleen Wyatt, 55, had lodged the claim against Dale Vince, 53, founder of wind-power firm Ecotricity.Mr Vince had previously appealed successfully against Ms Wyatt's claim on the basis it was too late.But five Supreme Court justices unanimously ruled in her favour when they gave their verdict earlier.Delivering the ruling, Lord Wilson said the court must have regard "to the contribution of each party to the welfare of the family, including by looking after the home or caring for the family".'Open season' fear[/size]The pair had a son, Dane, and lived a New Age traveller lifestyle before their eventual divorce, the court heard.Lord Wilson said Ms Wyatt had raised her son through "sixteen years of real hardship".Her claim was "legally recognisable" and not an "abuse of process", he said, although the £1.9m payout she had hoped to secure was too high an amount."It is obvious, even at this stage, that an award approaching that size is out of the question," he said.Analysis by Clive Coleman, BBC legal affairs correspondent[/size]This is a striking ruling that underlines the fact there is no time limit for ex-spouses to apply to a court for a financial settlement following a divorce - however weak their claim may be.Whereas there are strict time limits in other claims, such as those for breach of contract or personal injury, these claims can clearly be made decades after the divorce itself.The judgment is also a timely reminder that divorcing couples who want protection from such claims, even if they have no money at all, should obtain an order from the court at the time of the divorce, in which they both agree that there will be no further financial claims.That is the only way to guarantee that, if one of them goes on to make a fortune, they get to keep it."Her claim may even be dismissed."But there is, in our opinion, a real prospect that she will secure a comparatively modest award, perhaps of a size which would enable her to purchase a somewhat more comfortable, mortgage-free home."In a statement, Mr Vince branded the court's decision "mad"."I feel that we all have a right to move on, and not be looking over our shoulders," he said."This could signal open season for people who had brief relationships a quarter of a century ago."Mr Vince said the time gap was "extremely prejudicial" and the fact there was "no paperwork in existence" had enabled the claim.It was "hard to defend yourself" under such circumstances, he said.Mr Vince and Ms Wyatt had met as students in their early 20s and married in 1981.Ms Wyatt lived on benefits, while Mr Vince lived in an old ambulance before he launched green energy firm Ecotricity in Stroud, Gloucestershire in 1995.He started the business using a wind turbine he had made from recycled materials to power his caravan.He is now worth an estimated £107m and has an OBE.Ms Wyatt lodged her first claim for "financial remedy" in 2011.
Footballwipe Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 Horrible. Men and women who insist on leeching off of their ex-husband and wives when they've had nil input in their monetary earnings are the worst.
MooseBreath Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 That's absolutely disgusting. There are few more blatant examples of sexism than the way divorce proceedings are dealt with in the country.
Bellend Sebastian Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 No, but I'm getting married next year so ask me again in 2017
Benji Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 They look like the same person. You're joking right - it is the same person isn't it?
Nalis Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 You're joking right - it is the same person isn't it? I had to scroll back up to double check As for the OP, I believe Ray Parlour had to pay a chunk on his future earnings to his ex while he was still playing.
BoneDog Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 Greedy cow. My wife knows the score. Pre-nups bitch. The way I see it is if you want to leave you can trot on but you ain't taking half my shit. You can keep your own shit though - I'll allow that. That said, I wouldn't leave my wife because she's a delight to have around. Plus we signed a contract with God. You'd have to be mental to break that! I blame the 60's for tearing family life apart. It's all stemmed from that, and modern feminism. Seems nobody can be arsed to work through their little problems anymore. They'd rather do it Eastenders style, have a quick fix, get divorced and tear a family apart than try to be adults. I haven't seen my Dad since I was 3 or 4 and I blame the 60's, Eastenders, The Rolling Stones, feminism, free-love and all that shit. People are far too easily programmed by rock stars, movie stars, the msm and the psycho lesbian paedos who run the world. It's ridiculously easy to brainwash c*&ts nowadays.
BoneDog Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 I was thinking about this story while I was driving to Waitrose and I am quite appalled. There needs to be a new law that prevents this kind of crap. Any man worth his salt and who has the means would make sure his children were looked after anyway. There should be no need to even contemplate giving greedy ho's like this £1.9 mill of what you've earned in the 20 years after getting divorced. £100 a week towards childrens stuff should suffice. Why should she benefit to the tune of hundreds of thousands from something that has nothing to do with her? Unbebloodylievable.
Unabomber Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 Only just realised the person on the right is a guy.
Guest ttfn Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 Only just realised the person on the right is a guy. You can't take that tug back
katieakita Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 Scary stuff, My ex-wife got her solicitor to write saying "I thought more of Leicester City than her". Got mine to respond "Our client thinks more of Coventry City than her".
Trumpet Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 Scary stuff, My ex-wife got her solicitor to write saying "I thought more of Leicester City than her". Got mine to respond "Our client thinks more of Coventry City than her". Sensational.
Merging Cultures Posted 11 March 2015 Posted 11 March 2015 This is terrible. When my Dad went through his first divorce, he lost 50% of everything, including the pension. So, they take money from you now and then later when you retire. And now this?! Increase your wealth AFTER your divorce and she can still get some? Disgusting. Especially, when like my Dad, you don't want a divorce and the reasons are spurious.
Footballwipe Posted 12 March 2015 Posted 12 March 2015 Scary stuff, My ex-wife got her solicitor to write saying "I thought more of Leicester City than her". Got mine to respond "Our client thinks more of Coventry City than her". This has nowhere near enough rep points or kudos being attributed to it!
fuchsntf Posted 12 March 2015 Posted 12 March 2015 Since being a city fan, I have been divorced from any normal human feelings or emotions.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.