Similarly, a pension sharing order may not be made against a member’s benefits under a pension arrangement if there is already an earmarking order in force against the member’s benefits in that arrangement.
He continues: “The legislation governing pension rights on divorce is exceedingly complex.
It requires the parties involved – including the court and pension scheme trustees or managers, besides the couple and their advisers – to prepare and pass on detailed communications within a prescribed and often demanding timeframe.”
For this reason, he suggests scope for errors and omissions is huge.
Furthermore, he notes that pension sharing and earmarking legislation does not cover Pension Protection Fund compensation and Financial Assistance Scheme payments.
He adds: “Separate legislation to introduce earmarking and sharing of Pension Protection Fund compensation was included in the 2008 Pensions Act, effective from April 2011.”
What about HNW clients?
England is frequently seen as a very generous jurisdiction for high-net-worth individuals, according to Phoebe Turner, managing director of Stowe Family Law.
She explains that while it is preferential to initiate the original divorce proceedings in England, if the other party issues proceedings abroad first, then the other party can, in certain circumstances, bring Part III proceedings to help them get the most out of their divorce settlements.
She explains: “The purpose of Part III proceedings is to alleviate adverse consequences to one party where they have been given no, or insufficient financial provision by a foreign court if one of those parties has a sufficiently strong connection to England.”
For example, the ex-wife of a Russian oligarch is set to bring Britain's biggest divorce case to the High Court over her former husband's alleged £15bn fortune.
Ms Turner says: “Technically this is not a divorce case; Natalia Potanina and Vladimir Potanina are already divorced.
“However, Mrs Potanina is entitled to apply for a financial order in England under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 – this means the court can make an order for her to get further funds from her husband even after an overseas divorce (in this case in Russia).”
Mrs Potanina has been living in England since 2016, which Ms Turner says is likely to have been “a tactical move on the advice of her lawyers”.
Already divorced in Russia, it is understood that Mrs Potanina wants the case to be in London because her former husband has close ties to Putin and is therefore unconvinced that she would receive a fair outcome in Russia.
