I'm worth it, says ex-wife after sealing record £48m divorce deal

Beaming outside the Court of Appeal, Beverley Charman celebrated a ruling that she can keep her record payout.

Scroll down for more ...

Her ex-husband, multi-millionaire insurance magnate John Charman, had challenged the award -the biggest in British legal history - to his former wife, describing her share in his fortune as "grotesque and unfair".

The tycoon insisted his massive contribution to the £131million family fortune entitled him to the lion's share and his wife should only receive £20million.

But three judges dismissed 54-year- old Mr Charman's appeal - leaving the man known as the "king of the London insurance market" ruling a missed opportunity to settle the divorce battle at a quarter of the cost.

For friends of Mrs Charman have revealed that the mother of two would have accepted £12million and avoided a much-publicised legal battle that ended in the record-breaking payment.

Scroll down for more ...

Lawyers for the head of the Axis global insurance company had argued that the £20million offer to the woman Mr Charman described as "a housewife" was more than adequate and a £70million family trust should not have been included in the family assets by the High Court judge who awarded the £48million.

But her legal team cited House of Lords guidelines in big-money divorce cases indicating that assets should generally be equally divided between the breadwinner and the homemaker.

The Appeal Court sided with Mrs Charman, saying: "Neither in its method nor in its result do we regard the judge's treatment of the husband's special contribution as vulnerable to appeal."

After her victory, Mrs Charman, also 54, said: "I acknowledge that the sum awarded to me is huge by any standards but the Court of Appeal has decided that it fairly reflects the contributions made by John and me during our 28-year marriage.

"The breakdown of our marriage has been a painful experience for all concerned. Our divorce proceedings started nearly three years ago.

"It has been a difficult time, not just for me but for our family.

"I have been particularly concerned for our sons who have had to bear the discussion in public of our lives, our marriage and our divorce.

"I am relieved that the appeal is over and I hope that John and I can now concentrate on building our new lives."

Mr Charman, a tax exile in Bermuda, was not in court and now intends to make a final appeal directly to the House of Lords.

In a statement, he said: "English family law is in a mess. It is muddled, incomprehensible and lags behind that in most other countries.

"It allows judges to make decisions on a variety of criteria, to the detriment of everyone involved, apart from those making claims against high net worth individuals and their lawyers, who are getting rich by capitalising on the uncertainties which prevail.

"With every big money case which comes before the courts at the moment different rules seem to be applied, depending on the judges involved.

"It's now all something of a lottery and has little to do with fairness or justice. Until the law changes those that follow me will suffer similarly."

The couple both came from modest backgrounds, met at school and married in 1976. They moved in with Mrs Charman's parents in Strood, Kent, before buying their first home for £15,000.

She gave up work to look after their two sons while Mr Charman built his fortune in the insurance market in the City.

He moved to Bermuda in 2003 and the couple divorced two years later.

Mrs Charman, a magistrate, still lives in the £3million marital home in Kent - targeted by thieves earlier this year who tied her up at gunpoint and stole jewellery worth £300,000.

Days after her ordeal friends said Mr Charman had offered his wife £6million when their marriage collapsed after she heard rumours he was dating a younger woman.

Her offer to settle for £12million was apparently turned down.

Mr Charman - who had tried to get divorced in Bermuda - said divorce cases where the wealth was created by one partner should be regarded differently from others.

He said unless reform is introduced "London will remain the divorce capital of choice for the spouses of all very successful people and our courts will continue to be clogged with these complex cases".

His call for reform was echoed by the three Appeal Court judges, who called on the Law Commission to review divorce settlement laws.