With the explosion of wealth in recent years, lawyers say the number of complex, big money divorce cases is rising.

Last week the Court of Appeal upheld the largest contested settlement in English legal history when it awarded £48m to the wife of John Charman, the insurance tycoon. This followed other multimillion pound pay-offs, which together have earned England the reputation of being one of the most generous jurisdictions in the world for divorce.

How does divorce work in England?

The system in England and Wales is purely discretionary. Each case is decided on an individual basis.

Divorce judges focus predominantly on assets that have been accumulated during the marital period, and by whom. Pre-owned assets and those inherited by one spouse may also be included in the settlement, which is uncommon elsewhere. This discretionary approach allows more flexibility in the division of assets, but means proceedings can be unpredictable, and may therefore involve greater litigation.

How do proceedings differ elsewhere?

The US, Australia and New Zealand have similar systems. In other European countries divorce payouts follow a stricter formula. In France or Italy for example, each spouse might receive half of the value of the marital assets excluding those that were pre-owned.

What is the decision based on in England?

The two main factors in determining how assets should be split are: how long the couple have been married and whether they have children (and who has custody). The judge may also take into account who has contributed what and special circumstances such as disability.

Julian Lipson, a partner in the family team at Withers, says there is now little distinction between the contributions of the “home maker” and the “money maker”. So if one partner has had a significantly higher income than the other, this will not necessarily mean they walk away with more.

The courts will also look at misbehaviour by either partner, although to hold any weight, improper behaviour would usually have to have financial relevance – defrauding your spouse, for example. Extra-marital affairs are unlikely to make much of a difference.

The bias in England tends to be towards the partner who is considered the recipient – the non-working spouse, or homemaker, for instance – regardless of who files for divorce.

How are the assets usually split?

Lipson says there is an increasing move towards dividing assets equally unless there is good reason not to. However, if the court judges that 50 per cent of the marital assets would not be sufficient to fund the recipient’s needs, it could award a higher percentage.

Also, if one partner was considered to have made a special financial contribution to the marriage by means of a unique talent, this may be rewarded. In the Charman case, the husband’s success meant he had to pay his wife 37 per cent of the joint assets, rather than 50 per cent.

If there are children, the courts try to arrange the finances so they have broadly similar lifestyles between parents.

The longer the marriage, the greater payout the dependant partner is likely to receive. Any assets accumulated during the marriage would likely be divided equally.

What assets are usually taken into account?

All assets are taken into account – typically property, savings, pensions, share options and interests in family trusts.

What about ongoing maintenance?

The courts aim for “clean break” settlements. However, if there are not sufficient assets to meet the recipient’s needs, the payer may be required to make maintenance payments out of future income.

What about pre-nuptial agreements?

These are not legally binding in England, but could still help to sway the judge’s decision. Lipson says they are likely to hold more weight if the couple have been married just a few years and have no children. For example, if two wealthy individuals signed a pre-nuptial agreement to walk away with their own wealth, and they split a year or two later, their contract would probably hold. But if a couple had been married 10 or 12 years, or their situation had radically changed – maybe by having children or building significant wealth – any agreement may well be ignored.

Are there any ways spouses can get away with paying less?

It is fairly common for spouses to try to disguise assets by investing them offshore, for example. But the disclosure obligations are severe.

Spouses may try to “divorce plan” – that is, find ways to minimise their liability. They might, for example, encourage their partner to return to work – and therefore limit their financial dependency – or play down their partner’s lifestyle.

In cases where one spouse is financially dependant on the other, they can argue that they need to maintain their established lifestyle.

Is there any discrimination between the sexes?

Officially, no, but some lawyers believe the courts favour women.