Court awards ex-wife £20m in Young divorce case
A self-declared bankrupt, who was a former fixer for oligarchs, has been ordered to pay his ex-wife £20m – a fraction of the amount she had hoped for – by an English divorce court. Scot Young, who made his fortune in property and technology investments before the financial crisis, must pay Michelle, his former wife, a lump sum representing half his available assets, Mr Justice Moor ruled on Friday, in the culmination of an “extraordinary” case where “extremely serious allegations have been bandied around like confetti”.
The case has already cost Ms Young, 49, millions of pounds in legal and forensic-accounting fees, and Mr Young his freedom. He was jailed for six months for contempt of court because he did not obey court orders to provide details of his finances to his ex-wife. Ms Young, who obtained more than £4m in “litigation funding” – where investors provide finance to bring a case, in return for a slice of any award – maintained her ex-husband was worth “a few billion at least”. Mr Young, 51, says he is insolvent. The pair were married for 11 years and lived together for six years before that. They have two daughters. Ms Young said in evidence that they lived in “vast estates with staff” and that Mr Young bought her £1m of Graff diamonds for her 40th birthday, while Mr Young contested the lavish image, the judgment noted. “I have to be highly critical of the way in which the case has been conducted at various times by both parties. In many respects, this is about as bad an example of how not to litigate as any I have ever encountered,” Mr Justice Moor’s judgment reads. “I feel nothing but sympathy for the two children of these parties.” Legal experts said the case showed English divorce courts were willing to be much more robust in their examination of assets in contested proceedings, even though the courts rely on voluntary submissions from individuals. “The family courts are showing that they are prepared to investigate every element of a spouse’s financial affairs and are not afraid to try to unravel complex webs of assets to ensure that court orders are adhered to and the other party receives the payments awarded to them,” said Fiona Turner, a lawyer from Irwin Mitchell, a firm that was not involved in the case.