Banker sues ex-wife for £500,000 after she refuses to leave marital home
A banker is suing his ex-wife for £500,000 after she refused to move out of their marital home following their divorce.
Kerim Derhalli says that his ex-wife Jayne Richardson Derhalli had been ‘trespassing’ at the £6m property.
When the couple divorced after 17 years of marriage, they agreed a ‘clean break’ consent order to divide the family wealth. This saw Mrs Richardson Derhalli receive a £11.5m settlement.
Mrs Richardson Derhalli had received an initial £6.5m and was due a further £5m when the house in Kensington was sold.
However, they were unable to sell the property for their £8m asking price.
She continued to live in there, which led to Mr Derhalli telling her to “vacate the property within four weeks or start paying rent for her occupation”.
However, she argued she had the right to stay without paying rent until it was sold.
She continued to live there for nearly three years until the house was eventually sold for just under £6m.
Mr Derhalli then claimed £500,000 in rent for the three years that his ex-wife had lived in the property.
The judge ruled in his favour but added that the amount owing to him must be decided at a future hearing.
He said: “It is my view that Mr Derhalli was entitled to determine the licence to occupy with reasonable notice. It follows that Mrs Richardson Derhalli could be considered a trespasser from April 21, 2017, since when she remains liable to pay for the use and occupation of the property.”
If you would like more information or advice about the issues raised in this article, or any aspect of family law please contact our expert legal team on 0208 004 0065, by email at firstname.lastname@example.org or using the form below.
Case Citations: Kerim Derhalli v Jayne Richardson Derhalli - Central London County Court -Judge Nigel Gerald
The contents of this article is general information only. The information in this article is not legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this article was published. Readers should not act on the basis of the information included and should obtain independent expert advice from qualified solicitors such as those within our firm.