Saturday, December 19, 2009

Money, money, money

As the American media (who are still allowed to report the matter) wait with baited breath to see whether a certain golfer will shortly be required to make the biggest divorce payout in history, we on this side of the Atlantic also have tales to tell of money and divorce, albeit involving more modest sums.

The latest episode in the on-going saga of the Young v Young divorce was enacted at the High Court yesterday,when Mrs Justice Black ordered Mr Young to pay to Mrs Young maintenance pending suit of £27,500 a month, in addition to her rent of £10,400 a month and school fees of £36,000 a year. One may wonder how Mr Young will be able to afford to pay such sums when he professes to be 'broke', but Mrs Justice Black was "entirely satisfied that the husband has available monies to pay maintenance". As to the size of the award, she justified it by saying that she took into account the standard of living that the family were used to prior to the separation. That, dear reader, is how the other half lives...

Meanwhile, another divorce involving money (and a touch of scandal) is hitting the headlines. In what is becoming known as the 'indecent proposal' divorce, Mr Justice McFarlane has rejected the application of the wife, Alzbeta Holmokova, to have the case heard in private. She had sought this because of the ''salacious'' allegations being made by her husband, Denis Morley, including that Goldman Sachs banker Yann Samuelides had offered her £500,000 to leave him. Of course, media organisations had resisted the privacy application, arguing that scandal sells newspapers there was a public interest in open justice. For more gory details relating to this case, see this report in the Mirror.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.