As Incomes Dive, Finance Wizards & Others Seek Divorce Modifications
In better times, Brian Myerson had no problem with paying his wife of 26 years a lump-sum divorce settlement of about $16 million.
But now the former CEO of Principle Capital Holdings SA is asking a United Kingdom appeals court to cut the settlement to match his current financial situation, saying that he has only a small fraction of that amount himself because of a sudden decrease in value of the assets he is holding, Bloomberg reports.
He’s far from alone in making such arguments. As the economy—and incomes—plummeted among the London financial elite, CEOs, bankers and other high-earners are seeking respite from awards that seemed reasonable only a year or two ago, according to the news agency.
Whether relief will be granted, however, is uncertain for Myerson, since he agreed to the lump-sum settlement, which isn’t ordinarily negotiable after the fact under U.K. law. Hence, unless he can prove that the global economic free fall was an unforeseen event voiding his contract, it is probably binding.
Others who are paying alimony have a better case for modification, British lawyers tell Bloomberg, because alimony ordinarily is negotiable as circumstances change. Hence, a number of spouses are agreeing to renegotiate, even without a court order requiring them to do so.
When an ex-husband who was making 800,000 pounds annually suddenly is bringing in only about 150,000 pounds, “you have a pretty good case for downward variation, and the lawyer of the wife would advise to negotiate,” says partner Jane Craig of the Manches law firm in London.
Related coverage:
ABAJournal.com: “Paul Weiss Partner Calls $6.6M Divorce Settlement Unfair, Blames Madoff”
ABAJournal.com: “Bad News or Good News? Economy Cuts Asset Values, Creates New Divorce Issues”
