Big money case involving issues of matrimonial and non-matrimonial property, passive growth, and special contributions.
Held
- Holman J stated that the methodology for accounting for passive growth set out in Jones v Jones [2011] EWCA Civ 41, and advanced on behalf of the wife, was “a tool and not a rule”.
- In falling between the parties’ open positions, Holman J determined that he should treat half of the pre-existing shares as non-matrimonial. The overall award to the wife was £69million from a pot of £219 million; equivalent to 31%.
- In finding that the husband’s hard work, talent, and business acumen did not amount to special contribution, Holman J noted that the wife had been an excellent home-maker and to treat special contribution as unmatched would be highly discriminatory.