A partner in a leading firm of solicitors, who earned more than €760,000 in 2003 was ordered to pay €38,000 a year in maintenance to his former wife as part of the granting of a divorce by the High Court, according to a judgment that has just become available. The couple had been separated since 1992.
They had married in 1974 and had two children, born in the 1980s. The wife worked in a professional capacity until they had the children, when she gave up work to care for them. She did not return to the workforce until 2004, when she worked part-time with children.
When the couple separated in 1992, the family home was sold for €400,000, a considerable amount of money for a house at that time, and the sum was divided between them. However, the bulk of this, €175,000, was also given to the wife as a lump sum.
The husband agreed to pay €1,800 a month in maintenance of the wife and two children, along with school fees and medical bills. This meant that at the time of the separation most of the family's assets went to the wife, although the husband retained considerable earning capacity.
In the years that followed there was much acrimony between the pair about various aspects of the terms of the separation. The wife contended that the maintenance payments were meant to be net of tax, which the husband disputed, and there were disagreements about the payment of certain bills relating to the children.
The wife also complained that the husband had not fully disclosed all his assets at the time of the separation, but the court did not uphold her claim.
Some years after the separation, the husband had a child in another relationship. The wife sought a divorce and a number of financial orders, modifying the terms of the separation, which were dealt with by Mr Justice O'Higgins in his judgment.
On the husband's earning capacity, he declared that his income, after taxes, was €591,254 for 2003, the last year for which full figures were available. He had also acquired substantial assets in the years following the separation.
These included his own home worth €1.75 million, other properties in Ireland and abroad, insurance policies and investments worth in all about €4 million (some in trust for his children) and a pension fund of about €2 million.
The wife owned her home, worth about €1.1 million, and had a small sum in savings. The lump sum she received in 1992 had been spent.
Mr Justice O'Higgins accepted that due to her contribution to the life of the family by giving up work to care for the children, she needed and deserved continuing maintenance by the husband, and that she had expected this to be net of income tax. Accordingly, he increased her maintenance by about €10,000 a year, to total €38,000 after tax.
He also considered ways her income could be assured following the husband's retirement and in the event of his death.
He decided it could be met out of her husband's considerable post-retirement income from investments and pension, and suggested the purchase of an annuity for the wife on the husband's 70th birthday, to be secured on one of his Irish properties.
He also awarded her €50,000 in recognition of the extinction of her succession rights, and €50,000 to replace an agreement concerning the purchase of a car for her use on a regular basis.