Former UBS banker wins top court battle in £80m divorce row
The high-profile divorce clash between Clive Standish and his wife, Anna, over £80m of assets linked to a tax planning scheme has reached its end after the court rejected her appeal.
Clive Standish, the former chief financial officer of Swiss bank UBS, who retired in 2007, has been embroiled in a long-running legal battle with his wife over the £132m family fortune.
The legal issue at the heart of the case is over assets linked to a tax planning scheme.
Mr Standish, concerned about inheritance tax for the tax year April 2017, as he was set to be liable for around £32m in tax, was advised to transfer assets to his wife.
Mrs Standish was non-domiciled because her domicile of origin was Australia.
He went on to transfer approximately £77m worth of assets to her in March and early April 2017, which subsequently increased in value by over £80m.
She was expected to transfer the assets into a trust, but she never did this; she went on to commence divorce proceedings.
Mr Standish maintains that the majority of those assets were non-matrimonial property.
Mr Justice Moor at the Family Court in 2022 held that the assets were matrimonial property and divided them 60/40 in the husband’s favour. As a result, she was awarded £45m but ordered to transfer the other assets to her husband.
However, the Court of Appeal held that the assets transferred to the wife in 2017 were not transformed into matrimonial property, resulting in the court reducing her total award by 40 per cent to £25m.
Mrs Standish sought to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court, which went to trial in April.
However, on Wednesday, the justices rejected her case after finding the judges at the Court of Appeal applied the principles to the facts of the case.
Commenting on the decision, Sam Longworth, lead partner at Stewarts for Mr Standish said: “We are very grateful for the speed at which the Supreme Court reached this unanimous decision to reject the appeal of Mrs Standish against the largest ever reduction by the Court of Appeal to a divorce award.”
Withers family law partner Jennifer Dickson, noted: “Mr Standish has been able to have his cake and eat it today and wealthy spouses will breathe a sigh of relief at this Supreme Court judgment.”
Julian Ribet, partner at Ribet Myles Family Law, added: “Not all the wealth held by the parties to a marriage is automatically up for grabs on divorce — and this judgment makes that crystal clear.”
“This decision brings greater clarity to financially stronger parties seeking to undertake IHT planning and helps reduce the risk of them being exposed if their marriages break down,” Will MacFarlane, partner at Kinglsey Napley explained.