Afternoon:
15°c
It’s Day’s night, and no one is going to spoil her story
Talks to avert a damaging strike by British Airways cabin crew will resume as time runs out on efforts to break a deadlocked row over cost-cutting
More...
Macca divorce leak may cost Heather
By Robert Mendick, Evening Standard Last updated at 11:36am on 26.10.06
Settlement: Sir Paul may hold on to more of his fortune
Related links
Heather Mills may now receive a smaller divorce settlement from Sir Paul McCartney following the leak of court papers detailing sensational allegations against him.
A leading divorce expert suggested any money received from a gagging clause may now be greatly diminished because so much damaging material was already in the public domain. Sir Paul may even forsake a gagging clause enabling him to hold on to much more of his estimated £825 million fortune.
A gagging clause could be worth several million pounds.
Court papers leaked yesterday detailed a series of accusat ions against 64- year- old McCartney and made by Ms Mills, 38.
She claims McCartney was violent including allegations he stabbed her with a broken wine glass and pushed her into a bath when four months pregnant.
McCartney issued a statement last night in which he said he would defend "these allegations vigorously and appropriately". His lawyers Payne Hicks Beach stressed concern for his children during the divorce.
Her lawyers have insisted all her claims are true and that she is not responsible for the leak of court papers. She is threatening to sue newspapers which suggest otherwise. Her law firm Mischon de Reya is investigating who leaked the papers.
Lawyers have expressed surprise that so much lurid detail was contained in Ms Mills' response to McCartney's petition for divorce. Outrageous behaviour has no bearing on the sums awarded in divorce settlements.
The contents of the papers run counter to Law Society guidelines which "actively discourage unnecessary allegations" in divorce papers for the sake of any children. Experts predict she could receive anywhere between £30m and £50m.
But she may now have lost out on a further sum - paid out to her if she was to sign a gagging clause preventing her talking or writing about the marriage. But any value on the clause - worth several million pounds - would now be severely diminished.
McCartney now has little incentive to pay her huge sums to keep quiet.
Leading divorce lawyer James Stewart, a partner at law firm Manches said: "I find very detailed allegations of over-thetop behaviour in divorce petitions unnecessary, distasteful and almost guaranteed to be counter productive."
He speculated the allegations may have been made in an attempt to secure a large confidentiality agreement. "If she was trying to extract the premium to secure confidentiality it may well have rebounded."
More
Reader views (11)
It is hard to say what Heather would do next.
- Joe, Kuching, Malaysia
The disclosure of these papers have been very convenient for Sir Paul McCartney. Would Heather be so misinformed of the implication of theses disclosures?
She's no saint but she's not dumb either!
- Ana, London
I suggest a boycott of charities associating themselves with Heather Mills. That should starve her of the oxygen of publicity.
- Jon, Berlin
Top lawyers do NOT leave their most high profile clients' files casually lying around next to the photocopier. Of course she instructed them to 'leak' the document. More so, the fact that they didn't 'leak' the papers that related to her bad behaviour.
- Anon, Guildford
Paul's probably not a saint, who is. However Heather's track record on telling truth and lies and not hyping up incidents is surely well known to most people by now. Serves as a valuable lesson for the older guys who are easily flattered with attention. The age of the celebrity has a lot of traps for the unwary.
- Silas Marner, Birmingham, UK
Women like Heather give decent women a bad name. Not only are more women going to hate her because of this but she's got some nerve trying to take down a great legend of our times and many, many people are going to hate her simlpy because she is trying to do that. Who's to blame in this mess? I think their relationship track records speak for themselves. The last time I checked, Paul had a happy, healthy marriage to a woman named Linda. What about Heather? Yep, I thought so!
- Anonymous, UK
Heather Mills, clearly attracted at first glance by Paul McCartney's youthful good looks and Liverpudlian wit, looks like the lucky winner of at least twenty-plus million pounds from where I'm standing.
Not to be sneezed at for a blissful, relatively short marriage, eh?
But don't miss the `must read' memoirs of this `unfortunate' female, plus the DVD and a whole range of in-depth, highly entertaining interviews, coming your way real soon!
Ain't life a gas!
- Ted Knight, Shetland
She seems to me to be a very clever scheming woman, if she was genuine they would have split queitly and she would have been kept comfortable for the rest of her life. It appears she wants more than that.
- Steve Richi, Leeds England UK
I think we can safely say that she has just shot herself in her other foot!
- Joe, London
This woman is ghastly and was a nightmare from the start - a self-publicist and totally maniupulative. It's a shame that poor Paul McCartney was duped but he will, through these ridiculous allegations, gain massive support in the country and abroad. I don't know anyone who takes her side.
- Christine Campbell, London, UK
In my opinion, it`s obvious that this woman was only interested in Maccas's fortune from the very beginning and Paul's mistake was to love her sincerely. He didn't speculate like she did.
- Verónica Gomez De Emiliani, Cordoba -
