PigBenis
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2007
- Messages
- 2,432
- Reaction score
- 1
A WOMAN once married to racing magnate Robert Sangster has been called a career divorcee by her fourth husband as she tries to grab a chunk of his $100 million fortune - just 14 months after they wed.
Susan Sangster became Susan Crossley after marrying Australian developer Stuart Crossley in a whirlwind courtship and wedding in Barbados.
They have agreed to divorce - but she is declaring the pre-nuptial agreement they signed is invalid because he failed to tell her about "tens of millions" he had in offshore accounts.
In a groundbreaking ruling yesterday, three British Court of Appeal judges dismissed her appeal over a hearing next month which will evaluate the pre-nup and whether it means her claims against her husband should be thrown out.
Lord Justice Thorpe, giving the ruling of the court, said: "This is a quite exceptional case on its facts. If ever there is to be a paradigm case in which the courts will look to the pre-nuptial agreement as not simply one of the peripheral factors of the case but a factor of magnetic importance, then it seems to me that this is such a case."
Lawyers for Mr Crossley said the appeal judges had ruled it is possible to short-circuit normal procedures when a financial claim in a divorce appears to be hopeless and there is a pre-nuptial contract.
The judges dismissed Mrs Crossley's appeal against a High Court judge's decision that the facts of the case could be heard in a one-day hearing rather than multiple hearings covering 18 months.
Mr Crossley had asked Justice Bennett in the High Court to short-circuit normal procedures because they were only married for 14 months, there were no children, both had independent wealth and had signed an agreement forbidding court action over their finances on divorce.
His lawyers said the final decision after the hearing next February should provide long-awaited clarification on the degree to which pre-nuptial agreements are binding in the courts.
Mr Crossley said after the hearing: "This is a fair decision. I am upset that our marriage failed. Sadly, my wife is a career divorcee."
He met his future wife in the summer of 2005 and was engaged within a few months.
Before their marriage in January 2006, they signed the pre-nuptial contract agreeing they would leave the marriage without making claims against each other.
She filed for divorce in August - although from June 2006 the couple had lived largely separate lives.
When Mrs Crossley applied for the full range of financial claims against her husband, he asked the court to order that the case should be heard in one day.
Justice Bennett agreed, ordering a hearing to consider all the facts of the case and whether Mrs Crossley should be held to the terms of the pre-nuptial contract.
The story of Ms Crossley's string of wealthy men began in her teens when, as an attractive blond model, she married the heir to the Kwik Save store chain in England.
The marriage lasted 18 months. She then met tax exile Peter Lilley, heir to the Lilley and Skinner shoe fortune, and at age 22 they married but divorced a short time later.
She then met multi-millionaire Robert Sangster - 20 years her senior - and three years later became Mrs Sangster. Their marriage ended in 2000.
Her divorce payouts are worth an estimated $50 million
Susan Sangster became Susan Crossley after marrying Australian developer Stuart Crossley in a whirlwind courtship and wedding in Barbados.
They have agreed to divorce - but she is declaring the pre-nuptial agreement they signed is invalid because he failed to tell her about "tens of millions" he had in offshore accounts.
In a groundbreaking ruling yesterday, three British Court of Appeal judges dismissed her appeal over a hearing next month which will evaluate the pre-nup and whether it means her claims against her husband should be thrown out.
Lord Justice Thorpe, giving the ruling of the court, said: "This is a quite exceptional case on its facts. If ever there is to be a paradigm case in which the courts will look to the pre-nuptial agreement as not simply one of the peripheral factors of the case but a factor of magnetic importance, then it seems to me that this is such a case."
Lawyers for Mr Crossley said the appeal judges had ruled it is possible to short-circuit normal procedures when a financial claim in a divorce appears to be hopeless and there is a pre-nuptial contract.
The judges dismissed Mrs Crossley's appeal against a High Court judge's decision that the facts of the case could be heard in a one-day hearing rather than multiple hearings covering 18 months.
Mr Crossley had asked Justice Bennett in the High Court to short-circuit normal procedures because they were only married for 14 months, there were no children, both had independent wealth and had signed an agreement forbidding court action over their finances on divorce.
His lawyers said the final decision after the hearing next February should provide long-awaited clarification on the degree to which pre-nuptial agreements are binding in the courts.
Mr Crossley said after the hearing: "This is a fair decision. I am upset that our marriage failed. Sadly, my wife is a career divorcee."
He met his future wife in the summer of 2005 and was engaged within a few months.
Before their marriage in January 2006, they signed the pre-nuptial contract agreeing they would leave the marriage without making claims against each other.
She filed for divorce in August - although from June 2006 the couple had lived largely separate lives.
When Mrs Crossley applied for the full range of financial claims against her husband, he asked the court to order that the case should be heard in one day.
Justice Bennett agreed, ordering a hearing to consider all the facts of the case and whether Mrs Crossley should be held to the terms of the pre-nuptial contract.
The story of Ms Crossley's string of wealthy men began in her teens when, as an attractive blond model, she married the heir to the Kwik Save store chain in England.
The marriage lasted 18 months. She then met tax exile Peter Lilley, heir to the Lilley and Skinner shoe fortune, and at age 22 they married but divorced a short time later.
She then met multi-millionaire Robert Sangster - 20 years her senior - and three years later became Mrs Sangster. Their marriage ended in 2000.
Her divorce payouts are worth an estimated $50 million
