When Maria Mills and Graham Mills legally separated in 2002 after 13 years of marriage, the couple agreed that Mr Mills would pay his former partner a lump sum of £230,000. He also agreed to pay her £1,100 a month in personal maintenance payments. He kept his businesses, while she took away most of what was described as the couple’s “liquid capital”.

Several years after the settlement, Mrs Mills has now taken her husband back to court in a claim for more money. The Telegraph reports that the former estate agent, 51, lost all of her initial settlement and a good deal of the rest of the money in a series of unwise property investments. Judges at London’s Appeals Court heard that Mrs Mills had been aiming to get on the property ladder by investing in upmarket London properties, but ended up overstretching and overfinancing herself without seeing enough profit from the sale of each property to cover mortgage liabilities. Mrs Mills is now without any of the capital or assets she acquired in 2002 and now lives in a rented property working two days a week as a beauty therapist.

A surprising ruling

In what came as a shock to many, and particularly to Mr Mills himself, is that the Appeals Court judges agreed with Mrs Mills’ solicitor that he should increase his payments to his ex-wife as she is now “unable to cover her basic needs” and cannot manage financially. The surveyor was ordered to increase his monthly payments from £1,100 to £1,441 a month.

During the case, Mr Mills’ barrister Philip Cayford QC argued:

"This is a case where the wife leaves the marriage with all, or almost all the liquid capital, then says she needs maintenance for another 50 years, despite proving herself capable of working to a high standard,"

"It is the husband's case that he should not be the insurer against the wife's poor financial decisions, taken over the course of the 15 years that have passed since the original ancillary relief order... the time is long overdue for the wife to terminate her financial dependency on the husband."

"The husband has done all that could be reasonably expected of him in his reasonable wish to move on post-divorce. The same cannot be said of the wife. The husband has played no part in the wife's losses... and yet is expected effectively to pick up the tab.”

Meanwhile, Mrs Mills’ barrister Frank Feehan QC argued that his client had not been “wanton” with her finances and had suffered from health problems that prevented her from working. He also said that his client was trying to secure a living wage for herself and the couple’s son, who is now an adult.

If you’re facing a complicated battle over assets, make sure you have an expert on your team. Tracey Miller Family Law is one of the most experienced law firms Liverpool has to offer, so you’ll be in excellent hands.