Mother-in-law admits she wanted to reduce divorce settlement to her grandchildren’s mother
A HUSBAND has been accused of an elaborate multimillion-dollar ruse to slash his ex-wife’s share of their $50 million asset pool in divorce battle that has lasted longer than their marriage.
Law & Order
Don't miss out on the headlines from Law & Order. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A DIVORCING couple has spent a year longer battling over the carve-up of their $50 million estate than their marriage lasted.
The pair enjoyed a luxurious lifestyle during their 4½- year marriage, with expensive overseas travel, clothing, motor vehicles and homes.
But since they split, the Family Court has heard “Mr Karllsson” and “Ms Karllsson” — court-given pseudonyms — have fought over their fortune and access to their two young children, conceived by IVF.
DRUG SCAM CHEMIST WINS SUSPENSION DELAY FOR SHOP SALE
MP RICHARDSON’S HUSBAND, MOTHER FEUD OVER PROPERTY
DRUG TRAFFICKING NURSE STRIPPED OF REGISTRATION
Mr Karllsson was accused of trying to short change his ex-wife in an elaborate ruse with his mother, who openly acknowledged she wished to minimise whatever payment her son had to make to his ex.
After separating, the court heard Mr Karllsson purchased a home for $3.8 million, using borrowings from a family trust — a $1 million loan from his mother.
Mr Karllsson has since received more cash from his mum, some of which he spent on a $4.6 million renovation of his new home; including installing a lift for his seven cars.
The works only increased his new home’s value by $800,000 but helped lift his debt to his mother to more than $8.6 million.
The court heard Mr Karllsson had made no repayments, with the loan’s terms allowing interest, now accruing at more than $600,000 a year, to be capitalised each month.
Ms Karllsson alleged no money would be repaid and argued the renovation was a massive overcapitalisation and part of a contrivance by Mr Karllsson and his mother to pay her less by shrinking the value of their property pool.
Judge Janine Stevenson agreed the loan seemed designed to create a large debt between Mr Karllsson and his mother and said she would take this apparent intent into account in the wife’s favour.
When the pair moved in together Ms Karllsson was an undischarged bankrupt with few assets, earning $75,000 a year.
Mr Karllsson worked for the family’s extensive commercial enterprise and already owned various properties, including an apartment and a house in Europe, and during the marriage inherited $39 million from his father.
Ms Karllsson claimed their property pool now totalled $77 million and she was entitled to 35 per cent, or $27 million, plus $20,000 a week maintenance and $700 a week child support.
Regardless of the asset pool, Mr Karllsson said his ex should get $6.2 million, or $4.5 million to add to the $1.7 million partial settlement she had already received.
Justice Stevenson found the couple’s assets totalled $49.8 million.
She ruled against awarding spousal maintenance or increased child support, with Mr Karllsson already voluntarily supporting their children, paying $550 a week in support and footing all their school fees and expenses, private health insurance and medical expenses.
However, Justice Stevenson ruled it was in the best interests of the children that Ms Karllsson get a $11.4 million settlement — including her $30,000 jewellery collection.
“I consider that it would be contrary to their best interests if there was a significant disparity in the lifestyle available to them in the homes of their mother and father,” she said.
“They are accustomed to a luxurious lifestyle, which was created for them jointly by the parties.”
Mr Karllsson has now been given three months to pay his ex $9.7 million — more than double what he argued was fair.