The case below gives another warning about 'stoic non-disclosure' when in financial proceedings as part of divorce.
The husband refused to provide details of his offshore assets during the proceedings. Costs orders are still quite rare in family proceedings but his behaviour led the judge to order him to pay £140,000 to his wife for her legal costs alone. The judge also found that the chances were that his undisclosed assets were worth £300,000, and then split their assets equally on that basis, which meant the wife actually received 65% of the assets they had each disclosed. When the husband tried to appeal this on the grounds it wasn't fair, he was refused.
The moral of the story? It is better to put forward a strong case using disclosure than leave it to the judge to effectively guess what your assets might be.
Rabia v Rabia (2014) Appeal by the husband against an order in which the judge introduced into the balancing exercise an additional £300,000 of undisclosed assets for the husband, bringing the figures down to a 50/50 split. Appeal dismissed.