Music News

Blog Chatter

What are tags?

List

d1musicinfo on Clinton goes from inevitable nominee to on the ropes
wititio03 on Estudiante es gran rival de Chávez
kingfa39 on Police to Dig for Graves at Manson Ranch
Marliakalina on Hasselbeck Offers View of Post-Baby Body
srpak on Busch Does It Again at Darlington

Feed

Top stories submitted and voted on from Propeller.

Judge Says Mills Claim Was `Exorbitant'

By JILL LAWLESS,

Posted: 2008-03-18 10:25:09

Filed Under: Celebrity Splitsville, Music News

LONDON (March 18) - Heather Mills was a less than candid court witness whose $250 million divorce claim was exorbitant, a judge said in his ruling on her divorce from Paul McCartney.

The judgment by Hugh Bennett was released Tuesday, after a court rejected Mills' attempt to block publication.

The Mills-McCartney Saga

Paul McCartney and his estranged wife Heather Mills failed to reach a deal in their bitter divorce after a week in court, leaving it to a judge to determine how much of the ex-Beatle's estimated $1.6 billion fortune she'll receive. According to reports, the judge is ready to set the number at around $50 million.
Ben Stansall, AFP / Getty Images
In addition to the $50 million, McCartney will reportedly pay Mills around $200,000 annually in child support for their daughter, Beatrice.
AP,AP
The 40-year-old former model, whose marriage to the pop icon lasted less than four years, represented herself in court after firing her lawyers last year.
Ben Stansall, AFP / Getty Images
McCartney and Mills met to discuss the divorce on Oct. 11. McCartney is seen arriving at the hearing.
Toby Melville, Reuters
Mills used a series of TV interviews, including a visit to 'Today' on Nov. 1, to lash out at tabloid media coverage of her divorce from Paul McCartney. Mills has called the press tour "cathartic," though her publicist quit over the matter.
NBC
In an appearance on British morning show GMTV on Oct. 31, Mills wept as she spoke about coverage that has pushed her "to the edge," adding, "I've had worse press than a pedophile or a murderer." Her public relations adviser quit after the media tour.
GM.TV
The couple met in 1999 at a charity event. They married in June 2002, four years after McCartney's first wife, Linda, died of breast cancer. The split was announced May 2006.
Hermann J. Knippertz, AP
The divorce has been ugly. In leaked court documents, the former model accused McCartney of being "physically violent" and abusive during their four-year marriage.
Rene Macura, AP
With the former Beatle's fortune estimated at $1.6 billion, it has the potential to be the most costly divorce in British legal history.
Copyright Applecorps Ltd. / AP
Mills, 39, appeared as a contestant on ABC's 'Dancing With the Stars' in early 2007. She was the first contestant to compete on the show with an artificial limb.
ABC

On Monday, Bennett awarded Mills a $48.6 million divorce settlement after her four-year marriage to the former Beatle. Mills had sought almost $250 million, while McCartney had offered $31.6 million, including Mills' own assets.

In his ruling, the judge said Mills' claim "is and was unreasonable, indeed exorbitant."

He also said Mills' evidence was "not just inconsistent and inaccurate but also less than candid. Overall she was a less than impressive witness."

McCartney's lawyers didn't object to publication, but Mills claimed details in the ruling could compromise the security of her 4-year-old daughter Beatrice.

"Miss Mills believes her daughter will be put in real danger. It is most disturbing," said lawyer David Rosen, who represented Mills in court. She did not attend the hearing.

Mills, 40, walked away from court with a settlement worth about $34,000 for every day of her marriage to the 65-year-old McCartney. But it was only a fifth of what she had sought and a fraction of McCartney's $800 million fortune.

Mills declared that she was "very, very, very pleased."

The settlement included a lump sum of $33 million, plus the assets Mills currently holds worth $15.6 million.

Some legal experts were surprised the former model did not get more.

"In the scheme of things, it's quite surprisingly low," said Patricia Hollings, a divorce specialist with London law firm Finers Stephens Innocent. "It is only offering her about 6 percent of his assets. In terms of high-wealth cases it's very low."

Photo Gallery

Ralph Orlowski, Getty Images

The Costliest Star Splits

1 of 11

Heather Mills will see a $48.6 million payday from her split with Paul McCartney. Just where does that land the couple on the list of the most expensive star splits ever?

McCartney left after the ruling without comment. But Mills emerged from the three-hour private hearing for an impromptu news conference on the courthouse steps - railing against McCartney's lawyer and accusing McCartney of underestimating his wealth.

"All of you that have researched know that it was always going to be a figure between 20 and 30 million" pounds, said a visibly agitated Mills. "Paul was offering a lot less than that. ... So we're very, very, very pleased."

Mills criticized McCartney's attorney Fiona Shackleton, who represented Prince Charles in his divorce from Princess Diana.

"She has called me many, many names before even meeting me when I was in a wheelchair," said Mills, whose own legal team, in an ironic twist, was led by Princess Diana's divorce lawyer until she fired them in November.

Shackleton emerged from court Monday with a wet head, reportedly from a glass of water that Mills had dumped on her. Mills told reporters Shackleton had been "baptized in court." McCartney's representatives declined to comment.

1. The fundamental issue was what financial provision should be made for Ms. Mills. She sought an award of almost 125 million pounds ($250 million). Sir Paul proposed that the wife should exit the marriage with assets of 15.8 million pounds ($31.6 million)inclusive of any lump sum award.

2. The judge decided that the husband should pay the wife a lump sum of 16.5 million pounds ($33 million) which together with her assets of 7.8 million pounds ($15.6 million) (which include her current properties) means that she exits her marriage with total assets of 24.3 million pounds ($48.6 million) inclusive of a deemed figure of 500,000 pounds ($1 million) referable to her overspending in the period of separation.

3. The judge found that the total value of all the husband's assets, including his business assets, was about 400 million pounds ($800 million). There was no evidence at all before him that he was worth 800 million pounds ($1.6 billion).

4. The judge found that although the parties met in 1999 and formed a relationship, the parties did not cohabit from March 2000 but did so from the date of the marriage (11 June 2002). The parties separated in April 2006. The length of the marriage was just under four years.

5. The judge refused to permit either party to raise as an issue the alleged conduct of the other on the broad ground that it was irrelevant.

6. The judge, in undertaking the exercise prescribed by section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1973, decided that the needs of the wife were a factor of magnetic importance.

7. The lump sum of 16.5 million pounds ($33 million) is made up of a sum of 14 million pounds ($28 million) as the capitalized figure for the wife's income needs, which the judge assessed at 600,000 pounds ($1.2 million) per annum, and a sum of 2.5 million pounds ($5 million) for the wife to buy a property in London.

8. Financial provision for Beatrice consists of a periodical payments order of 35,000 pounds ($70,000) per annum, the husband agreeing to pay for her nanny and her school fees.

9. The court made an order in the following terms:
Save for the release of the judgment and Order dated 17 March 2008 the Wife and the Husband and any persons acting on their behalves are strictly prohibited from publishing, disclosing, or in any way revealing without the consent of the other, the evidence, correspondence, transcripts, judgments or Orders in the proceedings concerning (a) the child of the family, (b) the main suit, (c) the cross-applications for ancillary relief, and (d) any marital confidences. If consent is not forthcoming then the party seeking publication shall be entitled to seek the permission of a Family Division Judge to do so.

10. The judge expressed his confidence that the media would respect the privacy and confidentiality of the Children Act and ancillary relief proceedings, including evidence and submissions (oral and in writing) given within both sets of proceedings.

Source: AP

McCartney also was ordered to pay $70,000 a year for Beatrice, and to pay for her nanny and school fees.

Mills said that was a paltry amount. "She's obviously meant to travel B class while her father travels A class," she said.

The settlement doesn't rank with the most expensive celebrity divorces. Basketball star Michael Jordan and singer-songwriter Neil Diamond both had to pay out about $150 million to settle their divorces, according to Forbes magazine.

British divorce settlements are generally lower than those in the U.S. But Mills' settlement is only about half of the biggest contested divorce settlement in British history - the 48 million pounds (about $90 million at the time) that insurance tycoon John Charman was ordered to pay his ex-wife in 2006.

Mills and McCartney went to court last month to decide on her share of his fortune, which had been estimated at as much as $1.6 billion. However, the judge found that McCartney's total worth was about $800 million.

Now that the case is over, Mills implored the media to just let it be.

"And I really hope now that me and my daughter can have a life and not be followed every single day and that is why I've come out, to give it closure," she said.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.

2008-03-18 10:23:08

Read Related Blogs and Articles

Must Read?

92 %