A well-off sea captain and his equestrian ex are locked in a divorce fight in court over a £10m fleet of ships.
While they were together Captain Paul Anthony Crowther, 54, and his horse-loving wife Caroline lived a life of luxury in a sprawling multimillion-pound manor house in the East Sussex countryside with an illustrious history, whilst operating a lucrative Brighton-based ship-chartering business.
Mrs Crowther, 49, a keen rider, splashed out on a string of ‘valuable horses,’ while the couple also enjoyed ‘valuable cars’ and ‘other indicators of….wealth,’ with their kids attending private schools.
But after the rich couple’s relationship collapsed in 2018, they began a court fight over the assets of their failed marriage.
Captain Paul Anthony Crowther, 54, is locked in a bitter divorce battle with ex-wife Caroline Crowther, 49 over a £10m fleet of ships owned by an offshore business that she is claiming should be included in their divorce settlement
Today the pair clashed in London’s Appeal Court, with Mrs Crowther arguing that a £10m fleet of boats owned by offshore companies were in reality assets of the marriage and ought to be put in the pot when their wealth is split.
But Cpt Crowther insists that the ships are not beneficially owned by him, his ex or their company and should be ignored in their divorce fight over money.
The court heard that, as well as the disputed ships, the former couple’s assets include the multi-million pound manor house which was their former matrimonial home, near Hartfield, in East Sussex.
The pair’s manor house at Landhurst was formerly the country home of film mogul J Arthur Rank, and is situated immediately adjacent to the farm where Winnie the Pooh was written, close to the site of the real Poohsticks Bridge in Ashdown Forest, and the places that inspired the Hundred Acre Wood.
Today the pair clashed in London’s Appeal Court, with Mrs Crowther arguing that a £10m fleet of boats owned by offshore companies were in reality assets of the marriage and ought to be put in the pot when their wealth is split. Pictured: The Atlantic Discovery, one of the boats being fought over
At an earlier hearing, Mr Justice Holman said that the former couple’s business Atlantic Marine and Aviation LLP which dealt in ‘in the ownership and chartering of ships….appears to have generated considerable rewards for them.’
As well as the lavish house, the judge said ‘they have a range of assets, including valuable horses, valuable cars and other indicators of some wealth.. Their children have been privately educated.’
‘The parties are now very deeply polarised,’ the judge added.
In 2012, whilst still together, the couple entered into an agreement with a Gibraltar-based business associate, Steven Knight, that five ships from their fleet would be transferred from the ownership of their company to that of Mr Knight or one of his offshore businesses.
Over the subsequent years, the couple made money by chartering, then sub-chartering, those ships or their successors.
As well as the disputed ships, the former couple’s assets include the multi-million pound manor house which was their former matrimonial home, near Hartfield, in East Sussex
Mr Crowther insists that the transfer of the ships to Mr Knight was a genuine and straightforward transaction, and that neither the Crowthers, nor their business, have any beneficial interest in them any more.
But Mrs Crowther says the transaction was a ‘sham’ carried out for tax purposes, and claims the ships are worth £10m, and should be regarded as marital assets.
Last year she obtained a series of freezing injunctions banning Cpt Crowther, Mr Knight and his companies from selling or otherwise disposing of the ships.
But Mr Justice Holman overturned the freezing orders in March this year.
The judge concluded that the transfer of the boats had been a genuine ‘commercial arrangement’ rather than an attempt ‘to defeat the claims of the wife to financial remedy orders.’
Today Charles Howard QC, for Mrs Crowther, asked the Court of Appeal to overturn that ruling.
‘The vessels form the majority of the assets of the marriage,’ he said, arguing that there is ‘clear evidence of a desire’ on the part of Cpt Crowther, Mr Knight and his companies ‘to defeat the wife’s claims for financial remedies.’
The barrister claimed an email from the husband, dated February 2019, stated that he and Mrs Crowther ‘are asset rich owning a [more than] £10m fleet of ships outright.’
If the freezing injunctions are not reinstated, ‘there is a real risk that judgment will go unsatisfied by reason of the disposal by (Mr Knight and his companies) of their assets unless they are restrained by court order from disposing of them,’ he said.
‘There is strong evidence that the husband and Mr Knight entered into a sham agreement…by which the husband purported to divest himself of all his vessels in favour of Mr Knight.
‘If the wife ultimately persuades the court that she and the husband are the true beneficial owners of the vessels and the companies that own them, this will be of small consolation if these assets have been sold and the proceeds spent or moved to another offshore jurisdiction by Mr Knight. Enforcement against Mr Knight in Gibraltar will be difficult, extremely expensive, and with no guarantee of success,’ he argued.
‘The husband and Mr Knight have already worked in unison in their attempt to take the vessels, and the income generated from them, out of the reach of the wife and the court,’ the wife’s barrister said, telling the court that Cpt Crowther ‘set up a parallel and rival company’ last year after the couple split ‘which stripped the family LLP (Atlantic Marine and Aviation LLP (‘AMA LLP’)) of its income from the disputed vessels.’
‘In all the circumstances, it was appropriate to uphold the freezing order until determination by the court of the issue of whether or not the husband and the wife are the true beneficial owners of offshore companies and vessels which are nominally owned by Mr Knight,’ the barrister concluded.
Charles Hale QC, for Cpt Crowther, urged the court to refuse the application for permission to appeal, and drop the freezing order which is still in place pending the wife’s appeal court challenge
He said that unless this is done one of Mr Knight’s companies ‘will be likely insolvent within a matter of weeks.’
‘We contend that the judge reached the correct conclusion in deciding to discharge the freezing order,’ he argued.
‘None of the documents, it is submitted, lend any credence to Mrs Crowther’s central claim that she and Paul Crowther are ultimate beneficial owners of the ships or any of the companies that own them.’
The barrister added that the husband, as well as Mr Knight and his companies, also ‘do not accept that the evidence supports a finding that there is a risk of dissipation.’
‘Mr Knight is a professional man who has been resident in Gibraltar for over 30 years. His businesses are based in Gibraltar.
‘The courts of Gibraltar readily make orders to give effect to orders made in this jurisdiction: indeed mirror orders were made in Gibraltar in the present case. Mr Knight has fully complied with the orders of the court and with the undertakings he has given,’ he added.
The hearing continues.