The High Court has given a third of the assets of a wealthy businessman to his former wife, thereby overturning the terms of a separation agreement in existence since 1981. It also ordered him to pay a quarter of his income in maintenance.
The ruling, given yesterday by Mr Justice O'Neill, will cause consternation among former spouses who acquired assets following the break-up of their marriages and who thought that separation agreements were final.
Yesterday's ruling follows lengthy litigation, including the overturning by the Supreme Court of an earlier judgment.
The case concerns a couple who married in 1963 and had six children. The husband pursued a successful career in business, while the wife pursued a traditional child-caring role. The marriage broke up in 1979, and in 1981 a separation agreement was concluded.
This provided for the wife to live in the family home and have custody of the children. Following the separation, the husband also gave additional sums towards the education of the children and repairs to the home.
His career took him to the US, where he became president of a multinational company and accumulated assets worth $3 million. He obtained a foreign divorce, which was not recognised in Ireland, and married again. His property in the US was owned jointly with his second wife. His first wife sought an Irish divorce, including various financial reliefs, in 1998.
In the High Court, Mr Justice Lavan ordered the husband to give her half his assets, half his US pensions and 80 per cent of an Irish pension he had acquired. This was appealed to the Supreme Court.
There Ms Justice McGuinness overturned these orders, on the basis that they were not related to the specific provisions of Irish divorce legislation. In particular the judge had not considered what weight should be given to the existing separation agreement, she said. The case was then referred back to the High Court and came before Mr Justice O'Neill.
He said that the existing separation agreement fell far short of the "proper provision" requirement in the Divorce Act.
Referring to his ruling that the husband's assets should be available to his first wife, he said he had built his career at the outset on the basis of freedom from day-to-day family responsibilities.
The family home in a country town is now worth €133,000, but the wife lives in a bed-sittingroom in Dublin, as she started studying when her youngest child graduated in 1994.
Mr Justice O'Neill held that she was entitled to live in some comfort in Dublin while she pursued her studies and ordered the payment of a lump sum of €450,000 for a house. He also ordered the payment of €40,000 a year in maintenance.
The fact that the first wife's future earning capacity was now very limited, given that she had fulfilled the role of homemaker and carer for her family for 30 years, was critical in assessing provision.