A rich businesswoman has won a court fight against paying £ 1.2 million to her ex-husband after she found out that her family had given him money behind her back.
Former Inxs manager Maria-Christina Copinger-Symes, a member of the Australian de la Sala Shipping Family worth around £ 300 million, married James Copinger-Symes, 57, in 1998, when he served as a major in the SAS.
With their four children, the couple settled in a house in Chelsea, an estimated more than £ 3 million, in which Maria acts for a while as European manager of Aussie Rock Superstars Inxs, led by tragic singer Michael Hutchence.
The couple split in 2022, in which the woman corresponded to a judicial order, including her ex £ 1,192,533, which means she between £ 2.5 million and £ 5 million of the fortune of the couple.
But she has now won a prevailing who can be destroyed, after she had learned that her super-rich alienated parents Bobby and Felicite Perez de la Sala chose her ex-husband's side during their divorce.
A court heard her parents, who labeled her a Judas after a long -term family difference, secretly donated him about £ 27.6 million in family money, while she pulled her out at the same time.
Lawyers for large Copinger symmes had claimed that he had donated the money after the divorce, but this was rejected after evidence demonstrated that he was looking for expensive property in cities such as Val d'Hseere and London from the end of 2020.
In a ruling at the Central Family Court, Judge Edward Hess ordered that the financial consequences of the divorce reconsider, in which Mrs. Copinger-Symes now demands that her ex-usband pays her about £ 14 million of his new wealth found.
Former Inxs manager Maria-Christina Copinger-Symes has won a court fight against paying £ 1.2 million to her ex-husband after she found that her family had given him money behind her back
The judge noted: “The proceedings for financial remedies between the woman and the husband were performed against the background of the very rich family of the woman who had very negative feelings about her and very positive feelings about the husband.”
After her marriage to big copinger-Symes in Sydney, Maria started a big fight with her parents who became so bitter that she was banned to attend her own father's funeral when he died in 2022.
The La Sala Dynasty had already been driven by a year -long court fight for the family fortune between two branches, led by Maria's parents on one side and her uncle Ernest to the other, with Felicite, 80 and Bobby who eventually won.
In his ruling, Judge Hess explained the background with the feud of Mrs. Copinger-Symes with her parents and said: 'The fact that the almost total alienation did not exist from 2017 is not under discussion.
'Bobby and Felicite decided at the end of 2017 to withdraw all financial and emotional support for women. They both swore legal explanations that explained why the woman did not stand up in their respective wills.
'There was a line about what the woman did with a gift from her parents of Aus $ 500,000 in February 2017.
'They thought that this should have been shared with the husband and previously had to pay school fees, but the woman kept the money for herself and demanded more money for the payment of school fees.
“There was also a huge row in November 2017 about ownership and the occupation of a family property on 2, Marlborough Street, London SW3, in which the woman seems to have behaved against other family members in a hostile way.”
Maria-Christina Copinger-Symes is depicted with Michael Hutchence, lead singer of the Aussie Rock Superstars Inxs, who died in 1997
He said that Mrs. Copinger-Symes never saw her father before he died, where her parents' expensive and ultimately successful lawsuits against the woman for a number of years, only ending in February 2022 to hide her or claim ownership of 2 , Marlborough Street. '
'In the years since 2017, this alienation has become just worse and worse. She was excluded from attending her father's funeral in 2022.
'Furthermore, after it turned out that in 2018 and 2019, and again later, the woman had approached Ernest to see if he was willing to pay her money to participate in his side of the family difference.
“Bobby wrote on March 11, 2018:”*You are planning to conclude a deal with Ernest. This is your ultimate betrayal of the whole family and the complete hypocrisy on your part “.
“In much written family communication afterwards, the woman was named 'Judas' – of course a reference to Judas Iscariot – as a characteristic of her betrayal.”
The judge said that the relationship of the La Sala family with the husband was completely different.
“The family not only liked it and liked him, but they also considered him absolutely loyal to them in the dispute with Ernest and they took his side to the woman about the divorce issues,” he said.
'It is in common that the result of these cases was that the proceedings for financial remedies between the woman and the husband were performed against the background of the very rich family of the woman who have very negative feelings about her and very positive feelings about the spouse .
Maria, married James Copinger-Symes, 57, in 1998, and later they settled with their four children in a house in Chelsea (photo), an estimated more than £ 3 million, worth it,
'For all practical purposes, he had completely taken over her and housed her position as a member of the De La Sala family. This is an exception to the normal rule that “blood is thicker than water”.
He further explained that, after the order in March 2022, Mrs. Copinger-Symes had not paid the money, making her Sas Major Ex 'impatient' in December 2022 and went back to court.
However, that movement led to the revelation in the court in 2023 that, after the settlement, Major Copinger-Syms “had come in substantial wealth … and suddenly a very rich man.”
“In due course it arose that the wealth came largely from gifts of a total of US $ 34,777.180 made by the mother/parents of the woman,” the judge said.
“Maybe it shouldn't have done, but this information came as a terrible shock for the woman and it led to a lot of activity of her lawyers.”
The woman went back to court and tried to destroy and reconsider the divorce order, now claiming about £ 14 million from the fortune of her ex-husband.
Lawyers for large Copinger-Symes argued that the settlement should remain in force, because the money was then given to him by the woman's parents.
But a pronunciation to the benefit of the woman on the basis of 'material non-publications', the judge said that the evidence suggested that the spouse must have known that the massive gift was on the cards before the partition scheme of March 2022 was signed.
“There was a lot of documentary evidence that the spouse at the end of 2020 and in 2021 looked at a large number of expensive property in Val d'Isere, London, Portugal and France and in the beginning of 2022,” he said.
'Given the financial position of the spouse at the moment … Many of the property would have been good from his price range and can really only be explained credibly by the fact that he knew that he would get considerable amounts in the near future.
“He explained in different ways that he was just a dreamer who liked to look at characteristics that he did not intend to buy or that he would have borrowed money to make a difference or that he used a visit to a home to Covid – to circumvent rules.
“But I found none of these statements very compelling. Some of his simultaneous exchanges with brokers give all the appearance of a serious buyer and he has of course bought one of these expensive properties.
'I cannot agree that the knowledge that the parents/mother of the woman were planning to donate a considerable amount to the spouse would have made no difference to the negotiations or the outcome in this case.
'In my opinion, the information would have made a considerable difference and it is far away from the minimis.
'I therefore concluded that the order of March 2022 should be reserved.
“If the man really didn't know anything about the likely arrival of gifts until July 5, 2022, the case might look very different.”
He later rejected an offer from the woman's mother to undo the gifts to the spouse and to reclaim the money himself.
The case has now been established to go back to the family court, with the woman demanding about £ 14 million from the spouse.
The last details of the judgment of Judge Hess were made last August, but the verdict has only been made available publicly.
