The recent case of Haskell v Haskell (2020 EWFC 9) is a stark reminder that the court can and will consider all the evidence which is available when considering what financial order to make on a divorce – and this includes social media posts. Elizabeth Hicks, partner at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner, writes
In brief, Haskell v Haskell involved a Russian multimillionaire who had an international complex corporate and trust structure in countries ranging from Africa to Sweden to Russia.
Go deeper with GlobalData
He and his wife had been married for 11 years before the marriage broke down due to his serial affairs and use of alcohol and cocaine.
While initially he promised to support his wife and their three children, one of whom was severely disabled, his position changed when he realised that there was no possibility of them reconciling. He became extremely financially controlling: he stopped paying maintenance, refused to pay rent on their London apartment, and did not deal with the possession proceedings. His wife and children will be evicted in March 2020.
While the husband had stopped paying maintenance, he continued to live the high life, travelling around the world and throwing lavish parties in his £10m ($11.6m) Cape Town home while holding expensive vintage bottles of wine. The court knew this because the husband posted regular photographs and updates on social media. The judge condemned the husband’s social media posts in which he stated “life is beautiful” and “it was a beautiful year”, while at the same time he was trying to sell the flat where his disabled child lived with her grandmother and was refusing to pay maintenance.
The husband portrayed himself as being in debt to the tune of £50m, excluding his trust assets. Having heard evidence over six days, the court concluded that while the husband was in a period of transition in his business, simply taking a snapshot view of his financial position now was not realistic, and it was plain that he had not changed his lifestyle or tried to sell one of a number of his properties.
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataThe court awarded the wife what she needed on the basis of a cash sum now (£647,732), with the balance in two years (£5.181m in March 2022), to allow the husband the transition period he was seeking for his business interests to develop.
When a court considers the level of financial order to make, the judge must take into account a whole host of factors including the parties’ resources now and in the foreseeable future, and the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage. Every case is decided on its own facts, and the court has discretion on the type and level of financial order to make.
It was plain from the facts of this case that the husband’s portrayal of himself as someone who was in dire straits was far from the truth, and that he would be in receipt of very substantial resources in the reasonably foreseeable future.
The writer sees more and more cases where social media plays a part in divorce proceedings. Often, the financially wealthier party will try and hide the reality of their assets behind a complex web of corporate and trust structures, involving inter-company loans and debts, and plead poverty. But they just cannot stop themselves from telling their friends and the world at large about their wealth and the lifestyle they are leading.
It is worth remembering that once something is posted on social media, it can and will be used in any future divorce proceedings. The family court in England and Wales has an inquisitorial role, and will look at all the evidence available to get to the truth.
The message here is that the truth will come out.
