Welcome to Intelligent Divorce

The Money and Divorce blog is brought to you by Intelligent Divorce, the new way to get fixed-fee specialist legal advice on splitting your money when you divorce.

Our blog provides illustrated practical guides for those going through the divorce process, plus news on divorce, money and family breakdown.

"I would like to let you know that I found your website so invaluable in my divorce process. I am having to represent myself due to lack of finances and I know for a fact I wouldn't have been able to do it had it not been for your fantastic website. I would recommend it to anyone who find themselves in a similar situation to me." Madeleine


13 April 2015

Divorcee who won £10m, but says ex-husband cheated her out of millions more, wins right to appeal

A divorcee who claims her ex-husband cheated her out of a multi-million-pound fortune has won the right to reopen their divorce battle in the Supreme Court, reports the Daily Mail.

Alison Sharland, 47, agreed a £10.35million settlement in a deal that saw her give up her claim to an equal share in her husband's software company.

But husband Charlie had lied about the value of his share in AppSense, and she now says she is entitled to more.

The Court of Appeal found that Mr Sharland, 54, had deliberately hidden information and lied to the court but refused to overturn the divorce settlement.

Mrs Sharland will now take her fight to the Supreme Court.

The Sharlands, from Wilmslow in Cheshire, married in 1993 and Mr Sharland founded the software company AppSense in 1999.

The couple, who have three children, separated in 2010 and agreed to split their assets.

But they could not agree over the value of Mr Sharland's share of AppSense, which has grown to become one of the biggest firms of its kind in the world with offices in Silicon Valley, New York, Australia and across Europe.

She eventually agreed to accept £10.35million in cash and property and 30 per cent of the proceeds from her husband's shares when they were put on the market.

The deal was agreed on the basis that they were worth no more than £32million.

But within days of the agreement an initial public offering on the stock market – which never took place – valued the company at more than £460million, meaning his shares were worth around £132million after tax.

Mr Sharland did not dispute that he misled his ex-wife and an Appeal Court judge said his conduct was 'deliberate and dishonest' but the court ruled that Mrs Sharland was bound by the agreement she had signed and refused her appeal.

The case will now be heard at the Supreme Court in June.