Rupert Nightingale, an artist who was supported by his former wife during their marriage, has taken her to the Court of Appeal, claiming the original divorce settlement was unfair.
Under the settlement, a £300,000 lump sum and maintenance of £50,000 a year were granted, but Mr Nightingale’s barrister said these amounts did not reflect the “standard of living they enjoyed during the marriage”.
A court heard that Mr Nightingale would be required to get a full-time job and vacate the £1m marital home if the maintenance payments from Kirsten Turner, his accountant ex-wife, were not increased by more than 50 per cent.
Mr Nightingale’s barrister emphasised that his client had not worked for 11 years and had earned 30 times less than his wife, with her annual salary of £420,000 as a partner at PriceWaterhouseCoopers.
In the original settlement, Judge Mark Everall QC said it was fair to expect Mr Nightingale to earn £36,000 per annum, and his maintenance was discounted by that amount.
However, Mr Michael Glaser, the barrister representing Mr Nightingale, argued it was “not reasonable” or in the family’s interest to force his client into an office job and that he “wishes to remain a house husband on at least a part-time basis.”
No date has been set for the full hearing of Mr Nightingale’s appeal.
Latest posts by Nigel Rowley (see all)
- Specialist legal advice crucial in relation to care home fees, trusts and IHT - January 19, 2018
- “Significant demand” for buy-to-let mortgages - January 15, 2018
- RBS shareholders propose overturning corporate governance in successive rebellion - January 12, 2018