England's longest divorce case is over. The questions it raised are not
The final decision in the divorce of Mr and Mrs Gohil was published in May, ending what is believed to be England's longest-running divorce case. The litigation spanned almost 24 years and drew in the Crown Prosecution Service. Back in 2002, the wife received just £270,000 ($357,373) and the family Peugeot. After 23 years, she has now been awarded £6.6 million from a fortune her husband had concealed. The Court of Appeal restated a long-established rule that assets cannot be hidden on divorce, and found the husband, a solicitor, to have been thoroughly and pervasively dishonest.
In April 2004, Mrs Gohil agreed to settle her divorce claims for a lump sum of £270,000 together with maintenance for herself and the children. In 2007, she applied to set aside the original order on the basis that her husband had significantly failed to disclose his assets. After years of extensive litigation, her application was eventually successful, and her financial claims were reheard 18 years later.
In the meantime, Mr Gohil was convicted of money laundering and fraud, sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment and made subject to confiscation proceedings.
Many of Mr Gohil's assets were held in the names of third parties, including family members, companies and offshore entities. Mrs Gohil argued that those assets belonged to her husband. The judge agreed with her in relation to a number of the assets, and had to balance her claim against the claims of the Crown Prosecution Service, which sought the confiscation of assets derived from criminal activities. The judge awarded Mrs Gohil assets valued at over £6.6 million, comprising the entirety of the assets that could be identified as untainted by the husband's criminal conduct.
Aside from the scale of the award and the remarkable duration of the case, it highlights a serious challenge in divorce proceedings: identifying the true extent of a spouse's wealth, which remains a prominent feature in many cases. It also underlines the risks and consequences of failing to provide full and frank disclosure.
Financial disclosure
As financial arrangements have become more sophisticated, opportunities to conceal assets have evolved alongside them. Wealth can now be held through complex corporate structures, offshore entities and digital assets, making it harder to identify and value. Cryptocurrency has introduced a further dimension to asset tracing, as holdings can be transferred and stored outside traditional banking systems. A recent survey by the Financial Conduct Authority found that over two million people in the UK now hold cryptocurrency.
There are several steps that can be taken to establish an accurate picture of a person's wealth.
The first is that both spouses are required to complete an extensive financial statement, known as a Form E, setting out their personal and financial circumstances. They must also produce supporting documentation to verify what they have disclosed.
Each spouse may then raise a questionnaire regarding the contents of the other's Form E and supporting documents. As long as the questions are relevant and proportionate, the court is likely to order that they be answered. These are standard parts of the court procedure.
In more complex cases, it may be necessary to instruct a private investigator to uncover hidden assets. A forensic accountant may be instructed to examine personal or company accounts and bank statements, identifying suspicious transactions or patterns of behaviour designed to obscure the true value of assets. Contrary to popular belief, cryptocurrency is not beyond scrutiny; experts can use blockchain analytics to trace transactions and identify digital holdings.
Where a spouse denies that an asset belongs to them and asserts that it is owned by a trust or a family member, it is possible to obtain orders joining the trustees or family members as parties to the proceedings and requiring them to disclose relevant information and documents. They may also be required to give evidence at hearings, where they will be subject to cross-examination.
Despite these tools, cash deposits remain difficult to unearth, and it can be hard to establish the true value of a business that involves many cash transactions.
It is important that those involved in divorce proceedings do not resort to self-help measures, such as taking confidential documents belonging to their spouse without consent or accessing their computer records. Conduct of this kind is likely to be criticised by the court and may amount to a criminal offence. An injunction could be sought requiring the return of the documents and all copies, prohibiting use of the information obtained, and potentially seeking damages and costs.
The role of advisors
Where there is a concern that one party may be hiding assets, it is important to seek legal advice at an early stage. A range of procedural tools is available to help uncover incomplete or inaccurate financial disclosure, from targeted requests for information to court applications where necessary. These measures can be highly effective in identifying discrepancies, but they cannot guarantee that every hidden asset will be found.
Advisors also have an important role in identifying potential warning signs and ensuring their clients understand their disclosure obligations. They must, however, remain alert to the limits of that role. They cannot assist with concealing assets, misrepresenting financial information or circumventing the disclosure process. Where concerns arise, advisors should encourage transparency and recommend appropriate legal advice, so that the financial settlement process is fair and compliant.
Joanna Toloczko is a Partner and Head of the Family Team at Orwins. If you are concerned about disclosure in a divorce or would like to discuss your circumstances, please contact our family team.
