In reply to Indy:
I assume you mean the law is an ass?
I don't really know the details, and I think these are probably important in this case.
It seems that when they divorced neither of them had any assets.
She apparently raised their son on benefits with little/no support from him. So what was he doing at the time? if he was similarly scraping a living on benefits/low wage etc then perhaps the reason he didn't give some kind of financial support was he didn't have any money and I can see no basis for any kind of substantial claim. On the other hand if he was off starting his company and raking it in (or at least laying the foundations for profit)while she was raising their child then I can see a much larger settlement being due on the basis that due to her raising his child she was unable to make similar efforts to gain an income.
You are right though that this has the potential to open some floodgates, but I doubt it would be worth the effort for ex wives of non-millionaires
Post edited at 19:24
