H -v- J (Matrimonial)

The wife is applying for a capital sum upon her divorce, such sum to be based on the value of her just share in the value of a dairy farming business and for spousal maintenance.

In his open position, the husband offers a lump sum of £25,000 on a clean break basis. By contrast, in her amended open position, the wife is applying for a lump sum of £92,441.80 to be paid in separate monthly payments of £950, plus spousal maintenance of £749.66 per month, an on-going total of £1,699.66 per month for some time to come.

The husband and wife, who are now aged respectively 52 and 46, lived together initially on the farm, but, subsequently they moved into a four-bedroomed house a few miles away from the farm. The husband continues to operate and to work at the farm. The parties' son A, now aged nearly 18, has joined his father on the farm. Father and A now live in a two-bedroom apartment and commute each day to the farm. The wife shares rented accommodation. The former matrimonial home at the farm is now occupied by farm staff as part of a remuneration package to a herdsman.

The extent to which the wife helped the husband in running the farm is disputed. Indeed, although she is still officially a director and secretary of the farm company, she disputes almost everything she possibly can about the farm, including the efficient day to day management of the farm, the efficient use of machinery, the policy on lease and hire of equipment and the farm accounts. In challenging the efficient management of the farm, she attempts to show that the business has been deliberately mismanaged in order to devalue the company and avoid the payment to her of her rightful share.

As a direct result of her contention, I have heard evidence from two accountants and two farming experts. Unfortunately neither the accountants, nor the farming experts, had spoken to each other prior to the hearing. However, in order to save time, each witness was allocated a limited time to give evidence.