The way you deal with disclosure of assets and how you handle your divorce really matters. Ideally both sides will be transparent about their finances and co-operate with the court as required. But this isn’t always easy, particularly if there’s a degree of animosity and distrust following the marriage breakdown. The 2022 High Court case of VV v VV is a useful illustration of how the conduct of parties during divorce proceedings can have a significant bearing on the final financial order.

VV was a bitterly contested financial case, involving multi-million pounds worth of assets. As we’ll see below both parties were guilty of misconduct. But the parties had different motives for their poor behaviour. And because the wife’s conduct had such a drastic, negative impact on the value of the husband’s assets the judge felt he had no option but to award her less than he might otherwise have done and to penalise her when it came to costs.

Background To VV v VV

The couple met in 2018. Both were in their fifties. There were no children. The husband was a high earning technology executive, the wife was a musician.

By August 2018 the husband was working for a digital technology company in America. As part of his employment package he would receive a significant number of shares in the company if he stayed in his role for at least one year.

The couple got engaged in March 2019. By September 2019, having been in his job for the year required for the lucrative stock options to kick in, the husband left his role in America and moved to the UK.

In January 2020 the couple got married. By June of that year they had separated, and the husband began financial remedy proceedings.

The couple were far apart when it came to what they each thought a financial settlement should look like. The husband offered the wife a lump sum of £400,000 on a clean break basis. In contrast the wife sought 50% of the husband’s shares in his former employer’s company. These were valued at approximate value of £6m.

In deciding what kind of financial order to make the court had to decide:

  1. Was the wife entitled to a share in the proceeds of sale of the shares (i.e. were the shares marital assets?)
  2. Did the parties’ conduct in the proceedings amount to misconduct?
  3. What were the wife’s needs?

Here we are chiefly concerned wite the question of misconduct.

How Can Conduct Affect Financial Settlement?

We examine the specific conduct of the parties in VV below. It’s first worth highlighting the four scenarios in which personal conduct can have a bearing on financial remedy proceedings:

  • Personal misconduct inflicted on the other during the marriage. This is only relevant in very rare occasions
  • Where one party has dissipated assets which would otherwise have formed part of the divisible matrimonial property. Again, it will only be in rare situations that this will apply
  • Litigation misconduct. Where proved, this should be severely penalised in costs, but it is unlikely that it will affect the overall settlement
  • Lack of full and frank disclosure that enable the court to make adverse inferences against one party

VV v VV The Husbands Conduct

The husband failed to disclose the extent of his shareholding in his former employer’s company. He suggested that their value was negligible. A lack of transparency like this as regards Form E is a serious matter. However, the husband explained his conduct on this occasion by saying that it was not so much an attempt to defeat his wife’s claim. Rather it was more a result of his fear that his wife in conjunction with his former employer would seek to interfere with a smooth realisation of the value of the shareholding.

As we’ll see it turned out that the husband’s fear was justified.

The court agreed that the lack of disclosure did amount to litigation misconduct. This would normally result in adverse cost consequences. But the judge was satisfied that the husband wasn’t motivated by a desire to pay his wife less. The judge relied on the fact that any money the husband received from selling the shares went into a bank account that he had properly disclosed in the Form E.

VV v VV The Wife’s Conduct

It became clear that the wife had, shortly after proceedings started, contacted the husband’s former employer directly with concerns that the value of the shares had not been disclosed on the husband’s Form E.

The former employer advised the wife to take the necessary steps to prevent the release of the shares to the husband. The steps she then took had catastrophic financial consequences. The fluctuation in the share price between the time when the husband wished to sell a portion of his holding and when he was actually able to sell resulted in a loss of approximately $76m.

The judge found that the conduct by the wife was ‘gross and obvious conduct’ which the court was entitled to take into account. Overall, in the judge’s view the wife directly caused the husband financial loss running into tens of millions of dollars.


The conduct of the parties mattered hugely in this case. That’s because the wife had failed to establish a sufficient length of cohabitation that could have enabled her to claim that the husband’s stock should be shared as matrimonial property. (See point 1 above.)

As a result the wife had to base her claim on needs and in this regard the court could consider the husband’s wealth, the length of the marriage, the wife’s age and health, and her standard of living.

In the event the judge awarded the wife £750,000 (a large part of which would go towards paying her legal bills). In a subsequent hearing she was ordered to pay £100,0000 towards husband’s costs because of her conduct. All in all a far cry from the £6 million originally claimed. And a warning too that in financial remedy proceedings participants should be wary of any action that could damage the personal financial position of the other party.

Got a question? Ask us now…

Kindly complete the form below to send an enquiry. Your message will be sent to one of our solicitors. Discretion is guaranteed.

Your Information

  • Consider including information such as: the name of your spouse (if relevant), the country you live in, the background to your problem.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Over 2000 FREE
consultations and counting…

Our free consultation can help you more clearly understand the legal issues relating your case and what your options are to move forward.

Request your free consultation

Or send us an enquiry

I had a 30-minute consultation with Samantha Jago where she clearly explained all my options and followed up with a detailed email of notes. I would highly recommend if you need help to clarify where you stand and getting options for how you move forward.

Jun 2024   Katherine Davey

I recently had a one hour pro bono consultation with Samantha Jago. I was really blown away by how much she was able to digest in such a short period of time and even more so by the report which I received shortly after.

Apr 2024   S DF

I had applied for a free consultation and I was contacted in a very short timeframe. Thank you so much for the insightful and thorough consultation, Kevin Danagher. You made me feel at ease and you provided clear expectations with the initial info I had provided... I have now a much better understanding on my query.

Feb 2024   Sonia Accardi

We had a very useful first consultation with Amber Matheson today. Amber took the time to understand our (somewhat complicated) set-up, and offered good, understandable advice on next steps. She followed up with a very thorough email clarifying what we had discussed. Highly recommended.

Feb 2024   Lucie

Lovely friendly experience. All questions were answered so that I understood completely.

Dec 2023   Ali Catlin

Very balanced, fair and pragmatic advice. Thoroughly recommend!!

Nov 2023   James Elliott

Henry graciously provided his time for a consultation. I found him to be highly knowledgeable, empathetic and he provided excellent advice which put my mind at ease. Would highly recommend Henry and his firm.

Oct 2023   Allan Ang

Henry Brookman went above and beyond during the free consultation, and even overran the allocated time. He provided invaluable professional advice in a courteous manner. I recommend his firm without reservation.

Sep 2023   Mario Ignatov

I only had my initial free review with Amelia yet I already feel much more strengthened in my legal and financial position. I am currently reflecting on the steps I want to take to negotiate my desired outcome of the financial settlement but, when I am ready to use the services of a lawyer, Amelia is definitely the top on my list.

Sep 2023   Nahid Toubia

I had a zoom consultation with Lauren Moir and she was incredible. Very patient, insightful and reassuring. She also advised me based on my previous conversations with another firm and also clarified various positions I am in. Highly recommend.

Aug 2023   Gary Hawes

I was very impressed with the friendly, helpful and professional service offered by Brookman Solicitors. The generous advice and knowledge offered during the initial free consultation has enabled us to have a much better understanding of our case and plan a way forward.

Jul 2023   Peter Jackson

I had a first consultation with Kevin, who very diligently and professionally provided an exhaustive overview of the divorce process and the best approach for my specific case.

Jul 2023   Giulia Matteo

Great service and excellent advice at the initial consultation. I would certainly recommend and use in the future.

Jul 2023   Tom James

Google Reviews
Ask A Question

Contact Us

If you have questions, contact us now, we can help you.

Enquire Now

Or call us on +44 (0)20 7430 8470