Work v Gray (Phase II: Computation and Distribution) [2016] EWHC 562 (Fam)

‘Phase II’ of financial remedy proceedings where Roberts J considered how to distribute the parties’ significant assets in accordance with the order of Holman J at ‘Phase I’, which required them to be shared equally.

Held

  • Roberts J rejected W’s argument that no discount should be applied to H’s investment portfolio. It was artificial to rely on the ‘embedded value’ of the investments whilst at the same time ignoring the existence of latent risk.
  • Furthermore, W’s own experts contended for some discounting of the investments. With respect to the level of the discount to be applied, Roberts J preferred the evidence of W’s expert who had approached the question of the discount to be applied by considering each asset in turn. Applying the analysis of the said expert, Her Ladyship then considered the discount to be applied to the various categories of asset.
  • Ultimately, Roberts J ordered H to pay W a balancing lump sum of ca. $5.5m (in addition to the ca. $109m already paid).

Stay Up To Date

Follow us on Linkedin to stay up to date with the latest news from 1 Hare Court.