T4K3.news
Court rules in favor of trader challenging divorce settlement
City trader Simon Entwistle's appeal against a £325,000 divorce settlement has been granted by the Court of Appeal.
Divorce appeals court ruled in favor of city trader Simon Entwistle after he argued gender bias diminished his rightful assets.
City trader wins divorce appeal after claim of gender bias
Simon Entwistle, a city trader who received £325,000 from his heiress ex-wife Jenny Helliwell's £66 million fortune, has won a divorce appeal. The Court of Appeal found that Helliwell engaged in fraud by failing to declare nearly £48 million in assets during their prenuptial negotiations. This ruling allows Entwistle's financial settlement to be reconsidered, as the previous judge upheld the prenuptial agreement, which was deemed invalid due to nondisclosure of significant wealth. The High Court will now reassess his claim for a larger share of Helliwell's fortune after the appeal judges highlighted the nondisclosure as fraudulent.
Key Takeaways
"The nondisclosure of the majority of her assets by the wife was undoubtedly deliberate."
This highlights the court's view on Helliwell's transparency during the prenuptial agreement process.
"The parties... are worse off now than if they never brought a claim in the first place, which is tragic for everybody."
This reflects the broader consequences of protracted legal disputes in divorce cases.
This case illustrates the evolving discussions around gender bias in financial settlements during divorces. Simon Entwistle's claim that he faced gender prejudice resonates with ongoing societal debates about equitable treatment in divorce cases. The appeal court's ruling suggests a potential shift, prioritizing transparency and fair disclosure, regardless of gender. As divorce settlements continue to gain attention, this outcome may encourage courts to reevaluate how prenuptial agreements are enforced, especially when one party conceals substantial assets.
Highlights
- Fraudulent behavior cannot stand in prenuptial agreements.
- Being married to wealth does not guarantee lifelong luxury.
- This ruling emphasizes the importance of full asset disclosure.
- Justice must balance financial needs with fair disclosures.
Concerns over gender bias and asset disclosure
The ruling raises questions about how gender dynamics and financial transparency play a role in divorce settlements. It highlights potential biases and the importance of equitable treatment in legal agreements.
The implications of this case may pave the way for more equitable divorce settlements in the future.
Enjoyed this? Let your friends know!
Related News
Court rules in favor of husband in divorce appeal
Brad Pitt files motion for Angelina Jolie's private messages
Hayes' appeal granted as conviction overturned
Adriana Gallardo builds $300 million insurance empire
Traders' Libor convictions overturned by Supreme Court
Supreme Court quashes Tom Hayes’ Libor conviction
Harvard faces Trump administration in funding hearing
Biden's Title IX changes face legal challenges
