The legal starting point is that there should be equality on divorce. This is known as the 'sharing principle'.

However, one of the factors that can lead a court to move away from the sharing principle is the length of the marriage.

Sharp v Sharp

This career-focused couple were both in their 40s and married in June 2009. In December 2013 the wife started divorce proceedings.

Their basic salaries were both around £100,000. However, Mrs Sharp also received discretionary annual bonuses totalling £10.5 million during the marriage.

The couple never had any joint bank accounts or investments, and Mr Sharp was not aware of the details of his wife's bonuses. Mrs Sharp fully funded their holidays, the purchase of two houses, and bought three Aston Martin cars for her husband.

What does the law say?

The court must consider a number of factors including the parties' age, length of the marriage and the parties' contributions, both financial and otherwise, including raising children. The duration of the marriage is therefore not the only factor to be assessed.

The court's decision

In the Sharps' case, their total assets were £6.9 million.

At the first hearing, the judge found no reason to depart from the sharing principle and awarded the husband £2.725 million.

However, the wife appealed on the basis that this was a short, dual career, childless marriage and they structured their finances in a particular way. The Court of Appeal awarded the husband a reduced sum of £2 million.

What does this mean if you are divorcing?

In the vast majority of cases, the sharing principle should still apply. However, this case demonstrates that there can be circumstances where there is good reason to depart from it.

It is therefore extremely important to obtain independent legal advice upon separation.

Megan Seabourne is a Partner at Watford based law firm VWV.