Expert Divorce Solicitors & Lawyers in Essex

As well as having dealt with complex businesses and high net worth cases, in the last year the family team have advised on:

• Complex financial settlements of family business, professional partnerships and family trusts
• Nullity proceedings
• Urgent applications including emergency freezing applications to freeze assets before they could be removed
• Financial settlements involving complex or multiple pensions that require an actuary’s report
• Lengthy financial proceedings resulted in healthy settlement for our client. The Husband declined to execute Charge over Shares after a negotiated financial settlement and final order and was clearly prevaricating in terms of delay.   He had to make a lump sum of £3,000,000 over three years and the first instalment was not paid on time, which resulted in the husband being in default and having failed to execute the security and therefore a freezing injunction was obtained in the High Court.  An order for costs was obtained against the husband, and the first instalment of the lump sum was paid at the end of 2023.  The freezing injunction remains in place to protect the balance of the client’s interest and the Charge on Shares has now been executed for the additional protection that offers pending a sale of the company which is allegedly being negotiated by the husband.
• High net worth divorces and financial application from wife - there was a family trust which owned part of the shares in the company – there was an issue of pre-marital accrual as the company had been started by the client’s father in 1986 but had grown exponentially under the client’s guidance since 2006.  The company was in the business of plastering / rendering and therefore faced very substantial numerous litigation in the post-Grenfell litigation climate in relation to buildings (towers) it had cladded over the last 7 to 10 years which no longer meet Building Regulation standards, and all of which have been surveyed in detail by the current owners / occupiers in respect of fire safety compliance.  The cost of these potential claims were a substantial risk to the company and at present, although insured, they still required substantial input of company assets in terms of time and management and legal fees.  These issues were exploited to ensure the client’s business assets were reduced in value from the estimate of the single joint expert of £31,000,000 to £6,000,000, resulting in a lump sum for this aspect of the claim payable of only £3,000,000 to the wife.
• This is a long marriage of 25 years where the client, the wife, was the sole breadwinner.  The Respondent husband has mental health difficulties and has not worked for approximately 20 years.  He was supported by our client, the Applicant, until separation in 2019 when he has been supported by his external family who have now generated Loan Agreements for tens of thousands of pounds of money that he owes them and put a charge on the family home.  There was a further property in his name, which his family allege they paid for, and from which he was receiving rental income until the same was transferred for nil consideration to the Respondent’s brother.  The Respondent alleges he is a long-time sufferer of PTSD, as he was present when his youngest brother was stabbed to death in 1990.  The client and her son had to move out of the family home in 2019 as it was essentially not fit for human habitation as the result of the Respondent’s hoarding of items.  This situation has obviously been exacerbated in their absence, and we will now seek the unusual order that the Respondent must vacate the property to allow the same to be fumigated and presented to the market for sale.  The courts are reluctant to take this step as, on the face of it, the Respondent has nowhere else to go and no funds to rent alternative accommodation.  Indeed, he may not even have the mental stability to proceed in this way.
  In terms of complexity, non-disclosure and issues of liabilities and transfer of assets there are a number of complex issues yet the total potential assets, taking everything into account, are still less than £600,000 which increases the complexity of achieving a fair outcome for all parties.
• We acted for the wife in a divorce and financial matter where the parties had been separated for more than 20 years. The parties had been separated for some time but had not formally divorced or finalised their finances. The parties were living separately in their own properties and did not have any joint assets. The client wanted a clean break order to make sure that neither party could make a claim on the other in the future. Both parties were happy with this, and a consent order was drafted to submit to the court.
  Once the order was submitted, the sealed copy was received quickly and sent to both parties. The divorce is still ongoing, and the final order can be applied for from the 1st February 2024.
  Our role in this matter relates to advising client on financial settlement.
  Key aspects:
• Property assets in the UK and Ethiopia
• Respondent built a property in Ethiopia valued upward of £500,000. Property was built for residential use but now being utilised commercially. The parties also have family home in South London valued at £450,000.
• Whilst it is not impossible to export currency from Ethiopia, the volatility of the Ethiopian property market and currency controls, has meant that the parties have difficulty realising and exporting any rental income or capital value from the Ethiopian property. Giving rise to cross border matters and issues, being addressed in the course of matter.
• Given our experience in matters relating to assets in Africa, hurdles with African property registration and volatile currency controls in this region, our ongoing involvement meant that client was reassured that we had a clear understanding of his matter and the objectives he was trying to achieve to settle the matter a quickly and amicably as possible. Though the matter is still ongoing, we are confident that a settlement will be achieved.