Text of Mills-McCartney settlement
This is a summary of the judgment handed down today (March 17, 2008). It is not a summary of every issue in the judgment. This summary forms no part of the judgmentUpdated: Mar 18, 2008 15:22 IST
Text of statement released by the Family Court on the financial settlement for Heather Mills in her divorce from Paul McCartney: This is a summary of the judgment handed down today (March 17, 2008). It is not a summary of every issue in the judgment. This summary forms no part of the judgment.
The court ruled that the judgment should be published but upon Ms Mills' application granted a stay of such publication pending her appeal to the Court of Appeal.
1. The fundamental issue was what financial provision should be made for Ms. Mills. She sought an award of almost £125 million (euro153 million; US$250 million). Sir Paul proposed that the wife should exit the marriage with assets of £15.8 million (euro20.7 million; US$31.6 million) inclusive of any lump sum award.
2. The judge decided that the husband should pay the wife a lump sum of £16.5 million (euro21.5 million; US$33 million) which together with her assets of £7.8 million (euro10 million US$15.6 million) (which include her current properties) means that she exits her marriage with total assets of £24.3 million (euro31 million; US$48.6 million) inclusive of a deemed figure of £500,000 (euro654,000; US$1 million) referable to her overspending in the period of separation.
3. The judge found that the total value of all the husbands assets, including his business assets, was about £400 million (523 million; US$800 million). There was no evidence at all before him that he was worth £800 million.
4. The judge found that although the parties met in 1999 and formed a relationship, the parties did not cohabit from March 2000 but did so from the date of the marriage (11 June 2002). The parties separated in April 2006. The length of the marriage was just under four years.
5. The judge refused to permit either party to raise as an issue the alleged conduct of the other on the broad ground that it was irrelevant.
6. The judge, in undertaking the exercise prescribed by section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1973, decided that the needs of the wife were a factor of magnetic importance.
7. The lump sum of £16.5 million is made up of a sum of £14 million (euro18 million; US$28 million) as the capitalised figure for the wife's income needs, which the judge assessed at £600,000 (euro784,000; US$1.2 million) per annum, and a sum of £2.5 million (US$5 billion; euro3.2 billion) for the wife to buy a property in London.
8. Financial provision for Beatrice consists of a periodical payments order of £35,000 (euro45,000; US$70,000) per annum, the husband agreeing to pay for her nanny and her school fees.
9. The court made an order in the following terms: Save for the release of the judgment and Order dated 17 March 2008 the Wife and the Husband and any persons acting on their behalves are strictly prohibited from publishing, disclosing, or in any way revealing without the consent of the other, the evidence, correspondence, transcripts, judgments or Orders in the proceedings concerning (a) the child of the family (b) the main suit (c) the cross-applications for ancillary relief, and (d) any marital confidences. If consent is not forthcoming then the party seeking publication shall be entitled to seek the permission of a Family Division Judge to do so.
10. The judge expressed his confidence that the media would respect the privacy and confidentiality of the Children Act and ancillary relief proceedings, including evidence and submissions (oral and in writing) given within both sets of proceedings.