Ex-wife uncovers business tycoon’s secret $480 million account in divorce battle

A globetrotting business tycoon has been ordered to pay his wife an extra $10m in their Sydney divorce case, after he made a mistake that led to her discovering a secret account with $480m.

 

A globetrotting business tycoon has been ordered to pay his wife an extra $10m in their Sydney divorce case, after he made a mistake that led to her discovering a secret account was his.

According to a recently published judgment, Justice Richard Schonell said both parties had “been at times untruthful”.

The husband, who can’t legally be named, claimed the account, which was attached to a company, belonged to his brother and that his assets were only worth $50m.

But the name of the company brought him unstuck, with the wife telling the court the name was also her husband’s nickname.

“During the relationship, the husband and I had a conversation during which he said to me words to the effect of: ‘My teacher gave me the name … because (it) sounds like victory and the teacher thought I would conquer …” the wife told the court.

A global businessman has been ordered to pay his Sydney-based wife an extra $10m after she discovered his secret bank account.

He also used that name as his username for multiple online accounts, the court heard.

Justice Schonell ruled that the husband was the true controller of that company and his brother was used as a “straw man”.

The court ruled the company had $480m and the couple’s total pool of wealth topped $565m.

After making the discovery, the wife asked the court to adjust her share of the couple’s asset split to $174m. However, the judge only awarded her an extra $10m, taking her total share to almost $20m.

This was because Justice Schonell found they were in a relationship for a relatively short period of time, had no children and the husband brought most of the wealth to the relationship.

The court heard one of the wife’s major contributions was to sell her apartment for $260,000 before their relationship began. She used the money as a deposit on another property.

The husband argued he shouldn’t have to pay his wife the massive amount of money because their marriage was “short”, less than 10 years.

The court heard the wife was a homemaker and gave up her career and studies to support her husband’s ambitions.

His business empire stretched all over the globe.

It was a similar situation for his property portfolio, worth tens of millions, which included blue chip Sydney properties and a $20m trophy home at an overseas location.

The court heard the wife has pursued her husband in similar court actions all over the world, with four cases on foot in multiple countries.

The wife, the husband and his brother were all called to give evidence in the trial — with all three leaving the judge unimpressed.

“They each have a clear motivation to give self-serving evidence and the findings and admissions … reveal they have been at times untruthful,” he said.

Justice Schonell found certain parts of the wife’s evidence were “implausible and at times fanciful” and that “the husband has sought to obscure the true extent of his wealth”.

Do you have a story for The Daily Telegraph? Message 0481 056 618 or email [e-mail]