Screwfix millionaire’s ex-wife is back in court saying she should get more than £7.4million of his £80million fortune
- James and Julia Goodard-Watts, both in their 50s, were together for 22 years
- Mr Gooddard-Watts, whose family founded Screwfix, was left with £75million
- His ex-wife has received £7.4million in total but is back in court asking for more
- Long dispute continues over claims she’d only have less than 10 per cent assets
The ex-wife of a multi-millionaire whose family founded Screwfix is back in court asking for more than £7.4million of his £80million fortune.
It is the latest in a long-lasting battle between James Goddard-Watts, 57, and his former wife Julia, 58, who have been contesting in the Family Division of the High Court in London.
Following the breakdown of their 22-year-relationship, Mr Goddard-Watts was left with £75million, while his ex-wife walked away with £7.4million.
But Peter Mitchell KC, representing Mrs Goddard-Watts, said on Thursday that the latest ruling meant that his client would be left with 10 per cent of his assets.
Mrs Gooddard-Watts has appealed against a ruling made by Sir Jonathan Cohen earlier this year but her ex-husband is contesting the appeal.
Lady Justice Macur, Lady Justice Nicola Davies and Lady Justice Carr are now considering arguments at a Court of Appeal hearing in London.
James Goddard-Watts (pictured with his partner Charlotte Harding) ended his 13-year marriage to his ex-wife Julia after 22 years together but Mrs Gooddard-Watts believes she is entitled to more than she received
The former couple, who married in 1996 reached an agreement in 2010 after the end of their 13-year marriage the year before.
Mr Goddard-Watts had agreed that his former wife should get a house worth £3.25 million and a £4 million lump sum.
But she subsequently complained that he had not revealed the full extent of his wealth.
A judge then concluded that Mr Goddard-Watts had ‘given a false presentation’ when making the 2010 agreement, and in 2016 he was told to hand Mrs Goddard-Watts more than £6 million.
Mrs Goddard-Watts returned to court again in 2018 and made further complaints.
Julia Goddard-Watts (above) is back in court claiming she has been left with less than 10 per cent of assets
She said Mr Goddard-Watts had not given full detail about the potential value of a deal he was involved in and a judge ruled in her favour in late 2019.
Mr Justice Holman said that, if the pair could not agree on a sum, a judge should again reassess evidence and decide whether Mrs Goddard-Watts should get more money.
He said a case in which a woman had twice complained about ‘non-disclosure’ after a settlement was ‘vanishingly rare’ and ‘probably unique’.
He also previously criticised Mr Goddard-Watts, who moved to Switzerland in 2010.
He said the businessman had been ‘evasive and at times misleading’ and had ‘given a false presentation’ when making the 2010 agreement.
During their marriage, Mr Goddard-Watts enjoyed a lavish lifestyle as well as becoming a keen racing driver, competing in a British GT championship at the Spa-Francorchamps track in Belgium in 1999.
Sir Jonathan reconsidered the case in January 2022 and awarded Mrs Goddard-Watts another £1.1 million. However, Mrs Goddard-Watts is back again and wants more.
‘Overall, including the award of £1.1 million, Mrs Goddard-Watts would exit with £7.4 million,’ Mr Mitchell told appeal judges in a written argument.
‘Mr Goddard-Watts would exit with £75 million.’
During their marriage, Mr Goddard-Watts (pictured with Ms Harding) enjoyed a lavish lifestyle as well as becoming a keen racing driver, competing in a British GT championship at the Spa-Francorchamps track in Belgium in 1999
Divorce through the ages: The Goddard-Watts feud in years
2010 – The Goddard-Watts end their 13-year marriage and Mr Goddard-Watts agreed Mrs Goddard-Watts should get a house worth £3.25 million and a £4 million lump sum.
2016 – After a judge review Mr Goddard-Watts is told to hand Mrs Goddard-Watts more than £6 million.
2018 – Mrs Goddard-Watts returned to court again and made a further complaint her ex had not given full detail about the potential value of a deal he was involved in.
2019 – Towards the end of the year a judge rules in her favour.
2022 – Mr Justice Cohen’s ruling leaves Mrs Gooddard-Watts with £7.4million and her ex-husband keeps £75million. But now, Mrs Gooddard-Watts is back in court, arguing that she has only been left with less than 10 per cent of assets.
He added: ‘There was no consideration by the judge of the fairness of these respective figures.’
Mr Mitchell said: ‘This appeal raises an important point of principle; should a person who has obtained an order – two orders in this case – through fraud be entitled nonetheless to benefit from their fraud.’
He said judges had made orders in 2010 – by consent – and in 2016, after a hearing, which had been set-aside because of Mr Goddard-Watts’s ‘fraudulent representations/non-disclosure’.
Mr Mitchell told appeal judges that the pair had met when Mr Goddard-Watts was in the RAF and had married in 1996.
Mr Goddard-Watts had ‘joined’ with his parents in their ‘modest hardware business’.
‘Through the parties’, Mr Goddard-Watts’s parents and Mr Goddard-Watts’s brother’s endeavours, that business was transformed and was sold for £85 million in 1999,’ said Mr Mitchell.
‘From this sale, Mr Goddard-Watts received £15 million net.
‘The parties applied these proceeds towards the building of the former matrimonial home near Yeovil (Somerset) and, amongst other things, the purchase of a fine holiday home in Mallorca, and a yacht.
‘It also supported the parties’ very good lifestyle.’
He said Mr Goddard-Watts had gone on to pursue new business ventures.
Mrs Goddard-Watts had wanted Sir Jonathan to rule that she should get more than £13million.
Tim Bishop KC, who represented Mr Goddard-Watts, told appeal judges that Sir Jonathan’s decisions were right and reasonable.
He said the appeal should be dismissed and argued that the hearing overseen by Sir Jonathan had been fair.
Mr Bishop accepted that two other judges have earlier concluded that there had been ‘litigation misconduct’ by Mr Goddard-Watts.
Lawyer Ros Bever, who is based at law firm Irwin Mitchell and represents Ms Goddard-Watts, said outside court: ‘Our client is asking the Court of Appeal to review the High Court’s decision. In this case assets were not shared because Julia and/or the court were unaware of their existence or value.’
Source: Read Full Article