The divorce of a couple who had accrued £30m in assets over the course of their 25 year marriage reminds professionals of the court’s view of post-separation conduct in any decision on division of assets.  

In the case of TF v SF [2025] EWHC 1659 (Fam) a husband (TF, known as H throughout the judgement) and wife (SF, known as W) were married for over 25 years, having met in their early twenties. Around 2 years into the relationship W, who had previously worked as a shopkeeper, ended her employment. She has not worked since. Their marriage was long and stable, and they raised children together, all of whom are now adults. The family enjoyed a high standard of living throughout the marriage, supported primarily by the husband’s business ventures.

Founded during the marriage, the business became the cornerstone of the family’s wealth, growing significantly in value over the years. The couple acquired multiple properties, including a substantial family home and investment properties, which appreciated in value. They also held various investment accounts and savings; amounting in total to c.£30m by the time of the separation.

The wife played a central role in supporting the family and the husband’s career, particularly in the early years, by managing the household and raising the children. Her contributions were acknowledged as non-financial but equally important to the success of the marriage.

Post-separation the court described the husband’s conduct as ‘obstructive and adversarial.’ He was found to been less than forthcoming in his financial disclosures. He delayed providing full and frank disclosure of his business interests and income, which raised concerns about his credibility and intentions. He retained control over the family business and was accused of manipulating financial information to understate its value. This included restructuring elements of the business and diverting income, which the court viewed as an attempt to reduce the wife’s entitlement.

The court also acknowledged the wife was placed at a disadvantage due to the husband’s control over financial resources and information, recognising the emotional and financial strain this caused her and took it into account when determining the final award.

Mr Justin Warshaw KC sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge said

“I remain aware of the contribution W has made to family life since separation and that such a contribution was made at a time that H was taking action which made that family life very much more difficult than it ought to have been.”

As a result, Mr Warshaw ‘acknowledged the complexities introduced by the husband’s conduct and exercised measured discretion—ultimately leaning in favour of the wife where the husband’s evidence lacked transparency’ said Emma Brunning, partner in the Family Team at Birketts who represented the wife in the case.

The outcomes was the award of a lump sum of £4.2 million to the wife, representing her fair share of the matrimonial assets, including a portion of the value of the husband’s business interests. She was also awarded a 50% pensions order and retained the martial home (c. £1.8m). The decision recognised the equal contributions of both parties during a long marriage, the need for a fair division of assets, not necessarily equal in numerical terms but equitable in outcome and the importance of a clean break, allowing both parties to move on financially independent of each other said Mr Warshaw.

“This long-running case saw the full weight of the law applied to secure a just outcome for the wife, including interim maintenance, protective orders to freeze assets, and directions for funding her legal costs. (Mr Warshaw) underscored the court’s ability to take a ‘by and large’ or holistic approach, rather than a rigid formula, particularly when assessing post-separation accrual. Crucially, he also recognised the wife’s continued contribution to family life after separation, despite the obstacles the husband placed in her path.”

concluded Brunning.