British millionaire, 74, accused of ‘squirrelling away’ £27million wins court battle over money with his estranged American wife – despite judge branding him an ‘inveterate liar’

• Andrew Baker was ordered to pay  £1.6million to his estranged wife Susan

A British millionaire accused of ‘squirrelling away’ at least £27million has won a court battle over money with his estranged American wife despite the judge having branded him an ‘inveterate liar’.

Andrew Baker, 74, a former company boss who is English and lives in Somerset, has been ordered to pay £1.6million to his estranged wife Susan.

Mrs Baker, 75, argued that she should get a £9.3million lump sum following the breakdown of her marriage, saying that was the amount she calculated she was due under a ‘separation agreement’ made with Mr Baker.

She also argued that Mr Baker, who had been chairman and chief executive Life Science Research Inc, had ‘squirrelled away’ at least $35million (USD) – about £27million.

But Mr Justice Mostyn, who considered arguments at a recent family hearing in London, has ruled against her and and concluded that the squirrelling allegation had not been proved. 

Andrew Baker, 74, has been ordered to pay £1.6million to his estranged wife Susan. Mrs Baker had accused him of ‘squirrelling away’ at least £27million, but the judge ruled against her and and concluded that the squirrelling allegation had not been proved

But Mr Justice Mostyn heard that the net value of Mr Baker’s ‘visible assets’ was about £5.6million – and the net value of Mrs Baker’s assets about £5.8million.

He has decided, in a written judgment published online, that the lump sum Mr Baker should pay is £1.6million.

Mr Justice Mostyn said the ‘effect’ of his decision would be to reduce Mr Baker’s ‘deemed net worth’ to about £3.9million and increase Mrs Baker’s net worth to £7.4million.

He heard that the couple had married in 1986 and separated a decade ago.

The judge, who is based in the Family Division of the High Court in London, said Mrs Baker had been ‘by far the better witness’.

Mr Justice Mostyn said Mr Baker was an ‘exceptionally poor witness’ and described him as ‘rude’, ‘argumentative’ and ‘truculent’.

‘It is clear to me that the husband’s personality is a toxic mixture of arrogance and dishonesty,’ said the judge.

‘He is an inveterate liar.’

The judge said Mr Baker was in ‘poor health physically and mentally’.

He said he had made allowance for the fact that Mr Baker’s mental difficulties had probably ‘aggravated these traits’.

Mr Justice Mostyn said Mr Baker had ‘lied’ to Mrs Baker during negotiations over the ‘separation agreement’, had ‘lied’ to Coutts bank for the ‘purposes of obtaining credit’, and had ‘lied systematically to this court during these proceedings’.

But he said he was not satisfied ‘on the balance of probability’ that a squirrelling allegation has been proved.

He said he was ‘not satisfied’, on an ‘assessment of the evidence’, that Mr Baker had ‘hidden funds’.

The judge said it would be ‘wrong to draw inferences’ that he had ‘any such funds’ based ‘simply on his dishonesty’.

Mr Justice Mostyn said: ‘The wife’s case stands and falls on the primary issue of fact, namely whether the husband has squirrelled away at least $35million (USD).

‘If he has not, then the issue is simply what award should justly be made to the wife from the husband’s visible assets having regard to the terms of the separation agreement.’

Source: Read Full Article