Sean Hilton

Potanina-v-Potanin: Divorce Experts Share their Views
Image by freepik
//

Potanina-v-Potanin: Divorce Experts Share their Views

Published on
Sean Hilton
Sean Hilton
Sital Fontenelle
Sital Fontenelle
Peter Burgess
Peter Burgess

The recent Court of Appeal ruling in London has reignited global attention on one of the most high-value divorce cases in history. Natalia Potanina, ex-wife of Russian billionaire Vladimir Potanin, has won the right to pursue a multi-billion-dollar claim for 50% of his stake in Norilsk Nickel, along with dividends and a luxury Moscow property.

Having previously received less than 1% of marital assets following their 2014 divorce, Potanina’s successful appeal marks a significant shift in what has already become a closely watched case.

To unpack the potential implications of this ruling, we asked leading experts Peter Burgess, Sital Fontenelle and Sean Hilton for their views.

Peter Burgess, partner at Burgess Mee, says:

“Today’s ruling further cements London’s position as the divorce capital of the world. Mrs Potanina’s $6bn claim has been thrown a lifeline, by the Court of Appeal allowing the claim to proceed. For UHNW individuals who have been badly served abroad, this judgment will be very welcome. Aspiring “divorce tourists” may appreciate the opportunity to demonstrate connection to this country at the substantive hearing, rather than at an earlier stage. However, this particular long-running high-value dispute may still have some way to go as it remains open to Mr Potanin to seek a further appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Sital Fontenelle, Head of the Family Law team at Kingsley Napley LLP, comments:

“All lawyers to international HNWs have been watching this case, given it concerns the limits to divorce tourism and is the latest determined example of a wife testing England’s reputation for being a fair and generous forum.

The Court of Appeal has today granted Natalia Potanina’s application for leave to bring a Part III claim meaning she is permitted to bring a claim for financial remedies in this jurisdiction following a divorce and financial settlement decided after a long marriage in Russia.   

The Court of Appeal had little difficulty in concluding that Mrs Potanina has solid grounds to bring her application on the basis of her connections to this country and the ‘limited’ view of her husband’s assets that was taken in Russia. The Court even went so far as to note that it could be argued the size of her award in Russia meant her reasonable needs could not be met. It also observed she had only received a fraction of what she might have received in this country.   

This will no doubt be disappointing to her husband and will dismay those who feel our divorce courts should be dealing with more local and needy cases. As the Court of Appeal notes, this case has been running for nearly 7 years and has consumed substantial resources of the court.

Although today’s decision is, of course, fact specific, the key point is that the door is still open; it reinforces our reputation for being divorce capital of the world and importantly there was no narrowing of the test for other potential claimants who have the appetite to bring litigation here.  We will therefore remain an attractive jurisdiction for divorce cases. 

However, it is unlikely to be the end of the matter since Mr Potanin may still have the appetite to appeal further and request the Supreme Court considers the substance of this case (their original review was procedural).  

This is a blockbuster case in financial terms – with considerable £s at stake in the billions rather than millions – so we can expect it will continue to be hard fought for several years to come.”

Sean Hilton, Family Partner, Stevens & Bolton, commented:

“Today’s Court of Appeal decision in the Potanin case marks a significant moment for international divorce law in England. By allowing Natalia Potanina’s financial claims to proceed despite her divorce being finalised in Russia the court confirmed its ability to intervene where a spouse claims they have received insufficient provision from a foreign divorce. Mrs Potanina was found to have a real and meaningful connection to England – she held a UK investor visa, owned property here, and had been habitually resident for over a year. The Judge did not agree with Mr Potanin’s claim that his ex-wife was a ‘divorce tourist’.

“The court also commented that under the Russian divorce Mrs Potanina received a “tiny fraction” of the sum she would have received if she had divorced in England, and that this may be more significant when Mr Potanin is required to give disclosure of his assets here. In those circumstances the Judge commented that it would be appropriate for the court to make a further financial award to Mrs Potanina, the extent of which will need to be determined at a further hearing.   

“This decision may now open the door to a raft of applications that have been waiting in the wings for clarity. It is clear this ruling will shape how we advise international clients going forward. While the procedure for these applications has been tightened, the court have made clear that if jurisdiction is established and there’s a real prospect of success for a spouse with a meaningful connection to this country, claims may still proceed with a broad discretion afforded to Judges – perhaps supporting the view that England is the ‘divorce capital of the world’.”

Keep up to date with latest divorce news.

About Peter Burgess

Peter is one of the two founding partners at Burgess Mee Family Law.

Having trained at top family law firm Withers LLP, Peter founded Burgess Mee with in 2013, where he advises on the full spectrum of family law issues across the firm’s three offices. Peter is also an FMC accredited mediator.

Get in touch with Peter today:

  • Email
  • Call on – 0203 824 9952

About Sital Fontenelle

Sital Fontenelle is the Head of the Family & Divorce team at Kingsley Napley. She specialises in the complex financial aspects of a divorce, negotiating and drafting of nuptial agreements as well as private children law cases. She typically acts for high-net-worth individuals, often on cases involving an international dimension, offshore trusts, family businesses, inherited wealth or asset tracing. She is also highly experienced in complex children cases. Sital is an active member of the Resolution Cohabitation committee and regularly speaks at international conferences on wealth protection and trusts. She is a recognised leader in her field in legal directories, including the Chambers Ultra High Net Worth Guide, Legal 500 UK, Chambers UK (finance and children) and Spears. As well as being ‘Recommended’ in the Spear’s 2023 Family Law Index, she won silver in the Woman of the Year – Future Leaders (Partner) category at the Powerwomen Awards 2020.

About Sean Hilton

Sean assists clients on a broad spectrum of matters ranging from complex high-value financial proceedings following divorce, to disputes in relation to children. For instance, Sean advises unmarried families on the consequences of a relationship breakdown and is instructed on pre and post nuptial agreements, often with an international element. Sean is considered as a “Rising Star” by the Legal 500 Directory and in the Thompson Reuters Super Lawyers List, and has recently been shortlisted for Family Lawyer of the Year – Senior/Managing Associate in the CityWealth Future Leader Awards.

Sean’s Stevens & Bolton profile and contact details are available here:

You might be interested in

Separation and Divorce in 2025: Navigating the Current Landscape and Looking Ahead
Image by freepik
/

Separation and Divorce in 2025: Navigating the Current Landscape and Looking Ahead

Published on
Sean Hilton
Sean Hilton
Partner
Stevens & Bolton

For those contemplating a separation or divorce, the idea of navigating the inevitable complexities that follow can be a daunting one. In addition to understanding the core legal principles, Family law is an area that constantly evolves. Judges react to changes in societal ideas and professionals working alongside separating or divorcing couples are constantly looking at new ways to support the clients, couples, and families they support. It is therefore important to stay up to speed with current trends, and to try where possible to predict the future direction of travel.

Cohabiting couples

Whilst it is not a new issue, the legal status (or lack thereof) of couples who are separating without having married remains a ‘hot topic’ in the Family law community. Despite significant noise, and pressure on policy makers (most notably by the organisation Resolution, and its members), there is no sign of change any time soon. It is important for those in that situation to take specialist advice on their options. Where any legal change is still some way off, those in, or entering into, cohabiting relationships should consider other routes of protection, for example Declarations of Trust or Cohabitation Agreements.

No-fault divorce

The consensus within the Family law community is that the introduction of the ‘no-fault’ divorce system has been a positive one. Any historic concerns that the no-fault system would result in a greater number of couples divorcing have proven unfounded as the recent statistics from His Majesty’s Court Service have shown.

Although able to avoid the ‘blame game’, there remains a clear bias towards divorce applications being issued on a sole basis (74% of all applications over the quarter most recently reported). The alternative is an application on a joint basis.

This bias could be because one person will often wish to divorce the other and take control of the process. It may also be because of the additional administrative burden that comes with a joint application, with those complexities heightened where the other applicant is acting in person. Another reason may be that given the access provided by the online divorce portal people are managing the divorce process themselves without solicitor involvement, perhaps even before taking any advice at all.

Regardless of the reasons, and the split of sole versus joint applications, the key is to ensure that the process can be managed with the least possible amount of animosity, particularly where children and finances are involved.

Resolving financial matters alongside divorce

The recent statistics also support a fact long understood by Family lawyers, and one that is of grave concern. Less than half of couples making an application for divorce then apply to the court for an order finalising their financial claims. It could be said that in some cases there may not be any money to be divided, so is an application necessary?

In short – yes. A couples’ financial claims remain ‘live’ even after they are legally divorced unless a Court order has dismissed them. In its simplest form this is by way of a ‘clean break’ order, dismissing all claims each spouse has against the other. This then ensures that no future claims can be bought. Looking ahead it may be that before granting a conditional or final order in the divorce process, the court asks the parties to confirm that they understand this fact and are either taking steps also to resolve their financial claims formally or have chosen not to do so.

Protecting assets acquired before marriage

Whilst it will be relevant for a smaller number of divorcing couples, those with pre-acquired assets that were bought into the marriage should take note of the long running case of Standish and Standish [2024] EWCA Civ 567. This is due before the Supreme Court this Spring with Judgement anticipated in the latter part of the year.

This case centres around the transfer of assets acquired pre-marriage into the name of a spouse for tax reasons, intended then to be placed in Trust. Those transfers into Trust did not take place and the subsequent argument on divorce was that those assets had become matrimonial by virtue of the transfer.

The key issue here is whether the transfer of the assets did in fact make them a matrimonial asset, despite the fact that they were clearly acquired pre-marriage and their transfer to the spouse was for a reason other than to ‘share’ them as part of the marriage. The same arguments could apply for assets that someone may inherit while married. For those where this is a possible issue, communication at the time of inheritance/transfer will be of key importance.

Pre- and post-nuptial agreements

Another protection method, and one that is increasingly common, is a pre- or post-nuptial agreement. Whilst the Family Court retains discretion in respect of nuptial agreements advisors can now give clients more certainty than ever that where properly executed (ideally in line with the Law Commission recommendations on Qualifying Nuptial Agreements), the terms should provide the intended protections.

Looking ahead, the recent case law confirms that Judges wish to avoid an overly paternalistic and interventionalist mentality. Where couples enter into nuptial agreements, and barring any vitiating factors, they should expect to be held to their terms.

Non-court dispute resolution (NCDR)

In cases where any element of negotiation is necessary NCDR should be the first consideration, particularly for higher net-worth couples. There remains a significant backlog in the family courts and recent changes in law have increased the likelihood of cases being openly reported. These factors make NCDR an evermore attractive proposition.

This area has developed at a rate of knots, and there is now an almost limitless range of options available, providing the ability to build a bespoke ‘package’, supported where necessary by third party experts such as financial advisors or therapists.

The rise in NCDR has been driven by the legal changes which, subject to some exceptions, require all divorcing couples to attempt it before issuing a court application. It has also been driven by the lived experience of clients, and their Lawyers, in navigating a Court system which is underfunded and overstretched. Whilst there will always be the need for a specialist Family Court, and the commitment of Judges working daily to assist couples and families cannot be questioned, the NCDR processes are time and cost effective and some of the country’s top Family law specialists are tailoring their practices to such processes.

The benefits of NCDR have been recognised and promoted within the Courts as shown by the proactive case management of Mr Nicholas Allen KC in NA v LA [2024] EWFC 113. The court will more frequently push cases back into an NCDR model where appropriate, and the number of cases using NCDR will continue to climb.

Horizon scanning

The Family law landscape is constantly changing, but keeping an eye on the key developments will allow those considering a separation or divorce to highlight any obviously important changes. This may be a preventative measure (for example a pre-nuptial agreement), or a pre-emptive measure (such as ensuring a settlement before a reported case is published), but for most it will be more important to keep abreast of the breadth of options available to assist in navigating the complexities of divorce and separation without unnecessary costs and distress.

About Sean Hilton

Sean Hilton, of Stevens & Bolton LLP assists clients on a broad spectrum of matters ranging from complex high-value financial proceedings following divorce, to disputes in relation to children. For instance, Sean advises unmarried families on the consequences of a relationship breakdown and is instructed on pre and post nuptial agreements, often with an international element. Sean is considered as a “Rising Star” by the Legal 500 Directory and in the Thompson Reuters Super Lawyers List, and has recently been shortlisted for Family Lawyer of the Year – Senior/Managing Associate in the CityWealth Future Leader Awards.

Sean’s Stevens & Bolton profile and contact details are available here, and he can be found on LinkedIn here.

You might be interested in