Heather Mills: FAIL - Page 6
I reject the wife's case that he is worth £800m. There is absolutely no evidence at all to support that figure or any figure anywhere near it.
The wife's total expenditure in the 15 month period was £3,715,683. If legal and forensic accountancy fees of £1,003,313 and £675,000 of property refurbishment are stripped out then the wife has spent in the 15 months period £2,037,376 on herself. Then if £775,000 is deducted from that, it is submitted that the wife has overspent by £1,262,376 in that period. [In other words, she overspent in a time frame shortly after the divorce to make it look like she needed more money than she actually needed]
In my judgment the wife's attitude in her Form E, her open offers, her oral and written evidence, and her submissions is that she is entitled for the indefinite future, if not for the whole of her life, to live at the same “rate†as the husband and to be kept in the style to which she perceives she was accustomed during the marriage.Although she strongly denied it her case boils down to the syndrome of “me, too†or “if he has it, I want it tooâ€. I shall say more about this when I consider what are the wife's needs.
It must have been absolutely plain to the wife after separation that it was wholly unrealistic to expect to go on living at the rate at which she perceived she was living.
For 10 months of the near 4 year marriage the husband was touring. This entailed first class international travel, first class hotels, and internal private flights. The husband and wife went on expensive and sometimes exotic holidays. They lived well.They often flew by private jet and /or helicopter. They always flew first class if flying with a commercial airline. The wife had an allowance of £360,000 p.a. The husband paid all the major bills.
But that said, their lifestyle in their homes, particularly in England, was comparatively simple. The Cabin was a very modest property. They largely stayed in and did not eat out. They enjoyed riding and yoga.
There was no round the clock security. The security in Sussex was provided by the farm workers. There was no live-in staff. The parties did not spend their time on yachts or, in the memorable phrase of the celebrated economist, Prof. J.K.Galbraith, on “conspicuous consumptionâ€.
They spent time in New York and at 11, Pintail, a modest holiday home. They never visited the Scottish properties.
I am satisfied that the wife has expected, and unreasonably, that such a lifestyle would not only continue but was her entitlement.
She did not moderate her spending after separation. I entirely accept that when a marriage breaks down, the maelstrom of a broken relationship may well envelop both spouses and make it very difficult for them to re-order their lives, particularly financial.
Continued on the next page
Follow Technorati