Monthly Archives: February 2016

The Huge Cost of Court Proceedings

The chairman of the Laura Ashley  Khoo Kay Peng has been ordered by the High Court this February to make an offer to Pauline Chai his estranged wife to end legal battle that has  cost him £6.1million in legal costs. Mr Justice Bodey gave his lawyers a 21 day ultimatum.

The case which at one stage was also running  in Malaysia, is one of the most expensive divorce cases ever to come before the UK courts.

Costs began to increase dramatically when Khoo fought and lost a bid to have the divorce decided in the Malaysian courts. Chai, who was Miss Malaysia 1969, won the argument that London was the appropriate location.

The Judge ordered “open offers of settlement” to be made by both sides, and said at a case management hearing: “I am striving to exercise some control over this titanic case. Otherwise the case will inevitably proceed on its expensive way to the detriment of the parties and the court’s resources. The actual resolution of the finances of this couple, who have more money between them than they could spend in their lifetimes, has unfortunately taken a second seat. The legal costs bill is going on for £6m at a stage where the case has barely reached the first fence.”

koo

Chai, 69, alleged that Koo,77, was worth more than £440 million and earned £5.4 million a year. They have five grown up children and she maintains that she is entitled to half of his fortune. He disputes her claim and maintains that his assets are worth £66 million.

The couple married in December 1970 and separated on Valentine’s Day 2013. A decree nisi was pronounced in January this year and is due to be made absolute later this month.

They bought their first property in England – Wentworth Park – in 1995, and then five years later acquired the 1,000-acre Rossway Park estate at Berkhamstead. Khoo has indirect interests in a variety of businesses through two holding companies in Malaysia as well as substantial holdings in Laura Ashley and Corus Hotels.

Although the figures and costs are extreme many couples who navigate financial proceedings within divorce in this country will be all too familiar with the huge cost of court proceedings to them. If a case reaches or nears a final hearing both parties can incur upwards of tens of thousands in legal costs and certainly many thousands for the first few hearings.

Here at Focus we offer mediation as an alternative route to resolve these disputes by allowing a separating couple to discuss various options with a trained mediator thus avoiding lengthy court battles and the stress that this entails. Throughout the process they both work with the mediator to help them reach an agreement that they are both comfortable with. Mediation gives the couple a degree of control over the speed and cost and is quicker and less expensive than court proceedings. Some couples prefer to have their lawyers with them at mediation. This can be arranged with a dual trained Focus mediator able to use the One Day civil model of mediation, which results in a binding agreement being drawn up by the lawyers on the day.

For more information please click on our website.

Tara Deegan

Heterosexual Couple lose civil partnership court challenge

A couple from London, were told in 2014 that they could not have a civil partnership because they did not meet the legal requirement of being the same sex.

Last week they took their case to the High Court saying they were being discriminated against.

KP_1549990_crop_1200x720

They had said that they wanted to commit to each other in a civil partnership as it focuses on equality and did not carry the patriarchal history and associations on marriage. Further that the current legislation was incompatible with their right to a private and family life.

However Mrs Justice Andrews dismissed their claim for judicial review.

One of the government’s arguments was that now gay couples are able to marry, civil partnerships might be abolished or phased out in the future, and changing the legislation before then would be “costly and complex”.

A spokesman welcomed the ruling saying the current regime of marriage and civil partnership does not disadvantage opposite sex couples.

An appeal is anticipated.