A Former Wife v A Former Husband

i. The equity in the former matrimonial home in [a town in Buckinghamshire] that is registered in the parties' joint names (�569,844 net after redemption of the mortgage, notional costs of sale, and estimated CGT);

ii. Bank account balances and investments in a mixture of the parties' joint and sole names (c.�582,706, excluding an estimated amount the applicant alleges is held by the respondent in undisclosed accounts in Egypt);

iii. The respondent's inherited interest in a block of flats in Cairo which he holds jointly with his mother and sister. At the most, the applicant asserts that the respondent's interest in the Cairo flats has a gross value of around �160,000. The respondent accepts he has inherited an interest in the flats but says that, from a practical perspective, the interest is illiquid and should be valued at nil;

iv. Jewellery gifted by the applicant's mother as well as jewellery purchased by the respondent during the marriage. Each party alleges that the other has possession of the jewellery. The value is in dispute but lies somewhere between �20,000 and �30,000. As the jewellery is "missing" (and there are no photographs or independent descriptions of it) it has not been possible to order a valuation of it.

i. I offered for the respondent's McKenzie friend to remain in the hearing as an observer should the respondent wish him to do so. I did this in the hope that it would provide some reassurance to the respondent as to the fairness of the process because it would enable him to have a close friend observing the hearing and reporting back to him. The respondent refused this offer and expressly told his McKenzie friend that under no circumstances was he to remain in the hearing if the respondent was not also allowed to be present;