The award of ÂŁ48 million ($95 million) to the wife of John Charman in divorce proceedings in London has been upheld by the Court of Appeal. In a decision still subject to further possible appeal and with unusual aspects to the facts, the fallout nonetheless seems likely to continue.

Simon Beccle, partner at law firm Payne Hicks Beach, said that the judgment is significant because it means that trusts set up with assets generated during the marriage will continue to be vulnerable to attack on divorce.

“It attacks the whole efficacy of setting up a trust arrangement. The inclusion of the trust in the asset pool as well as the size of the award will cause consternation and worry a lot of people. The judgment demonstrates that divorce is a much greater threat to wealth built up during marriage than almost any tax liability. It does however also confirm that 'special contribution' is still a reason for departing from an equal division of the assets in 'big money' cases and may give some comfort to wealthy spouses. Marriage continues to be a risky venture.”

The three senior judges who handed down the decision asked if more status should be given to prenuptial contracts - not at present binding in English law - and said “We would wish to lend our own weight to the call for a review of these matters by the Law Commission.”

James Freeman at law firm Speechly Bircham said: “The most interesting aspects of this judgment may be those found in these comments as to the future direction of the law. There is a candid admission that London is now viewed as the 'divorce capital of the world' and it is an open question whether this is desirable in a jurisdiction keen to attract wealth from around the world. Perhaps because of this there is also strong support for prenuptial agreements. Even though at this point they are influential rather than binding, it is increasingly obvious that no wealthy, engaged and sane individual should be without one.”