John Charman - Divorce

Divorce

Charman met his ex-wife Beverly in 1969 at school. When they married in 1976, neither had significant resources and the couple lived initially in her parents home, and then in his mothers home in Strood near Rochester, Kent. The couple eventually moved to Sevenoaks, where they bought a home now worth £2.75 million. The couple have two children: Nicholas (born 1981) and Michael (born 1986).

As Charman's wealth built, the couple created the Bermuda based Dragon Trust in 1987, which by 2006 had grown to a value of £65 million. The aim of the trust was according to Charman in his court papers agreed by the couple to preserve wealth for future generations.

After failing to secure a new house in England, in November 2003 Charman told his magistrate wife that he was taking up permanent residence in Bermuda and that their marriage was over. He has since set up home in a £2.1 million pound home in Bermuda, and has started a relationship with another woman.

Charman initially offered his ex-wife their home in Sevenoaks plus £6 million cash, but Mrs Charman, who was represented by Helen Ward, of Manches, argued that the length of the marriage together with her substantial contributions did not justify such a significant departure from equality. Charman eventually offered his wife a package valued at £20 million. However, his wife still believed that the sum was not enough, and appealed the sum through the UK legal process, declaring the assets of the couple in her legal papers as:

• £52.8 million in her husband's sole name
• £5.4 million in her sole name
• £2.1 million in their joint names
• £64.6 million in the Dragon Trust

Mrs Charman also declared that a separate £25 million trust catered for the needs of their sons, and so therefore Dragon Trust was an asset under the control of Charman.

On 2 August 2006, Mr Justice Coleridge decreed in the High Court of Justice that a fair settlement would involve Charman giving his wife around 37 per cent of his assets. This would involve not only agreeing transfer of assets worth £8 million already under his wife's control, but also an additional one-off lump sum of £40 million. In his written judgement, Mr Justice Coleridge said: "The husband is genuinely bemused that the wife should regard his £20 million offer as anything other than reasonable, even generous. Her refusal to compromise on his terms has led him to deploy every available point to protect what he regards as his wealth generated entirely by his efforts. In the narrow, old-fashioned sense, that perspective is understandable, if somewhat anachronistic. Nowadays it must attract little sympathy."

Charman, said: "This judgement is poor and blatantly discriminatory. By any reasonable standards this is an extraordinary decision. I made a fair and open offer to my wife of £20 million, which would be impossible for any reasonable person to spend in their lifetime." Charman later commented that he would be launching an immediate appeal, calling the High Court award "grotesque and unfair."

In review, the amount was at 37% slightly less than the wife received in White v White, the House of Lords case in 2000. That case established the principal that for long marriages the courts should begin their deliberations on how to divide marital assets from the standpoint of a 50:50 split between husband and wife, regardless of who earned the money.

Charman began selling shares in Axis on the NYSE to meet the interim legal arrangements, prior to his appeal. If required to complete full payment, then it is calculated that he will need to sell of his shares in Axis.

Charman and his representatives, Withers, have mounted a high profile media campaign arguing that White and subsequent decisions are discriminatory towards wealthy husbands.Charman and his legal team have been widely quoted in the British press. On 9 March 2007, Mrs Charman was tied up and robbed of jewellery worth £300,000 at her home, in an incident police believe could have been motivated by the press coverage the case has attracted.