New age travellers Mr Vince and Kathleen Turner divorced 20 years ago when they were living in an old ambulance in Bath. At the time the divorce was pronounced, and with few assets, there was no evidence that the couple had ever agreed a financial settlement. Now Mr Vince is the chief executive of Ecotricity, the company he created, and is worth an estimated £90m.
In December 2010 his former wife made an application to court seeking financial remedies on divorce. The Court of Appeal in May 2013 allowed Mr Vince’s application to strike out his former wife’s claim on the basis that it was an abuse of the court’s process.
In a case such as this, the parties may at the time they divorced have thought that because they had very few assets and a small income there was no need to resolve the division of finances between them. However if a couple conclude divorce proceedings without reaching a financial settlement and dismissing their respective claims for financial relief – which can include lump-sum orders, transfer of property, pension sharing and spousal maintenance – both parties’ claims for financial remedies technically remain open. This means that either party can, in principle, apply for financial relief against the other at any time down the line.
In law Ms Wyatt was perfectly entitled to apply for a share in Mr Vince’s wealth, even though it had been accumulated since their marriage.
There are no set rules for how long a party has to come to court with a claim for financial relief following divorce. Nicholas Mostyn QC, sitting as a judge in 2007, expressed the view that, generally, it would be difficult to allow a claim that was made more than six years after the date of the divorce petition without very good reasons.
In this case the judge took the view that it would be an abuse of process for Ms Wyatt to succeed where it had been so long since the parties divorced. Importantly there was no connection between what had happened during the marriage and the wealth that Mr Vince had subsequently created. If, however, the circumstances had been different – perhaps a longer marriage with the wealth created during its term and with the former wife applying for financial relief sooner – the court may well have reached different decision.
It is sensible for divorcing spouses to dismiss their financial claims against one another, even if at the time of the divorce they have no assets or income of any substance. If they do, then it will not be possible for their ex-spouse to come back for a second bite of the cherry in relation to capital.
The position in relation to income is, however, slightly different. If there has been a financial order providing for payment of maintenance from one spouse to the other, it is possible for either party to come back to court years later to apply for a variation.
The court provides that, in such a case, the former wife may come back years after the parties’ financial settlement but in relation to the husband’s income only.
If a former wife is successful in a variation application, for example to increase her spousal maintenance payments, it is then possible, provided her former husband has the resources, to argue for capitalisation of those payments. The courts, however, are very clear that this should not be seen as a ‘second bite of the cherry’ but rather as simply the court’s ability to capitalise maintenance.
In the case of Vince v Wyatt, Lord Justice Thorpe neatly summarised: “The facts of this case are extreme. Impecuniosity has been the experience of all the wife’s adult life… her husband was the most improbable candidate for affluence. The wife no doubt can appeal to his sense of charity, but in my judgement he is not to be compelled to boost the wife’s income… he is not her insurer against life’s eventualities.”
Harriet Errington is a solicitor for Boodle Hatfield.
New age travellers Dale Vince and Kathleen Turner divorced 20 years ago when they were living in an old ambulance in Bath.
In December 2010 the former wife made an application to court seeking financial remedies on divorce.
There are no set rules on how long a party has to come to court with a claim for financial relief following divorce.
