Must my ex-wife share an inheritance? My wife and I have been separated for almost a year and in the time since our separation my father sadly passed away and left me a considerable sum of money. As I was very close to my father, and my wife and I have not been together for some time now, I am reluctant that she should get a cut of my inheritance - above all for sentimental reasons - though I have been told that this is likely in the divorce courts. Is she still entitled to a share of my inheritance, despite our longstanding separation? And if so, is there anything I can do to avoid this? Henry Brookman, founding partner of Brookman solicitors, says your wife is not necessarily entitled to a share of your inheritance. The English and Welsh legal system allows a judge to use his or her discretion to adjust property and assets between spouses to achieve a just and equitable outcome. How a judge does that is essentially a three-stage process. First, he or she identifies all the assets held by either party or available to them. Having established what is in the pool of assets, the second stage is to work out what is the appropriate percentage allocation between the parties. Although equality is generally the starting point in medium-length marriages, it is only a starting point. The judge has to look at other factors such as whether the assets came into being predominantly from family contributions on one side or the other, or a stellar contribution by one party or the other and similar factors. Obviously in your case it is very significant that a chunk of your overall wealth arose by inheritance rather than through the joint work that you and your wife put into your family. The judge decides how to adjust for those factors, so that you might for example be seen as entitled to 70 per cent of the overall assets because the inheritance represents 20 per cent of your assets and all the other factors point to equality. Divorce test case Divorcing partners could avoid paying maintenance to spouses by declaring themselves bankrupt if Alexander McRoberts wins a test legal case. Company director McRoberts is attempting to get a £350,000 maintenance claim written off and if he succeeds, it could open the floodgates for a multitude of similar attempts, a High Court judge has been told. McRoberts separated from his wife in 2003 at which time she was given their former marital home and he agreed to pay her more than £500,000 by instalments. He now says he cannot afford to pay the remaining £349,000. McRoberts is asking the court to rule that his matrimonial debt did not "survive" his bankruptcy. Lawyers warned that discharging the obligations could open the door to bankrupts who do not want to pay lump sums in family proceedings. However, the judge said he did not want to do anything that would be seen to suggest that anyone going into bankruptcy could avoid the family court's orders. He went on to say that the case raised some curiosity as to the relationship between the bankruptcy jurisdiction and the family jurisdiction. The decision on the case has been reserved until a later date. The third stage then is for the judge to step back and decide whether applying that allocation of assets would, overall, be fair. The judge has to take into account the appropriate needs of both parties. If your wife is still caring for very young children and hence has a very limited earning capacity, an allocation of 30 per cent of the assets might be insufficient to achieve fairness. If the pool of assets was large, though, 30 per cent might well be enough. If she has a good career in line with yours, and 30 per cent of the assets meets her reasonable needs overall, the inheritance in effect might not be touched at all. A judge would also consider whether spousal maintenance is likely to be needed. Sometimes more capital will offset the need for maintenance, so there could be a compromise where you might have a smaller percentage of the assets but would not be liable for spousal maintenance. At this stage, unless you are an extreme risk taker, there are no practical steps that you can take to shelter the inheritance from the scrutiny of the court. Evasive manoeuvres will attract negative attention and as far as the court can manage it, you will be penalised for trying. Obviously, the inheritance at present is yours to do with as you wish, so you could try to place it in trusts in obscure Caribbean destinations. However, the judge will in that case probably substantially penalise you for trying, and recompense your wife from other assets that you have. Unless you plan to leave the country on an almost permanent basis, it is probably not a good idea.