As the partner of a man who also had a "tapeworm who took a second bite of the cherry" I heartily agree with the other comments. My now husband was badly advised by 2 lawyers and in consequence paid out twice to support a women who has 2 degrees but decided she didn't want to work.. He inherited some money when his father sadly died In the 9 years after the initial settlement and she decided to go back for some more - and she got it! We were told to contest it but thought it would be throwing more money after bad.

JS, Leeds, UK

Bravo for Mr. North. As a female, I am appalled at the behaviour of women like his ex-wife, whose only job in life seems to be that of a tapeworm. Any 'responsibility' he had toward her ended with the DIVORCE; and shouldn't translate into "you're my second daddy for life". The justice system is sadly not that at all; it is far too easy for someone to point a finger, with an outstretched hand, and be awarded compensation.

Federica, Toronto, ON, Canada

We live so very dishonourably nowadays. No wonder others have such a low opinion of us and our ways.

benson davis, colchester, uk

If this case is reported accurately, and I have no reason to doubt that it has, then the big question is whether Judge Green, a man of appalling judgement, should remain on the bench. I have never had to submit a case to the judgement of the bench but if this is the standard of our judges then no-one is likely to receive a judgement which is fair and balanced. Someone needs to act to protect the public in future from such errant judgements.

Mike Bowler, Shropshire, UK

A rare moment of sanity from our courts!

And can we now have a look at the ludicrous District Judge who "jumped to the impermissable conclusion"? Who made an "illogical inconsistency"? Whose approach was "fundamentally flawed"?

The District Judge who said that the ex-wife's problems were entirely of her own making, and that her ex-husband had no further responsibility for her, AND THEN AWARDED HER £202,000??

And this man is presumably still passing his asinine judgements on the citizens of this country? Can there be any reason why a man who would make such a statement should not be removed from his position immediately on the grounds that he is obviously terminally bewildered and has lost the power of rational thought?

If contemplating marriage, beware - despite her adultery, a lavish settlement, never doing a day's work, and you kept the kids - and 30 years later she comes back wanting more! And the Court, briefly, gave it to her!!

Jon Page, Winchester, UK

The ex wife leaves the guy and her children, for another man (his friend).

She gets the house and other payments - Why?
She should be the one paying to support the ex husband and children she abandoned.

30 years later, even in the COA - LJ Thorpe says she might be entitled to some more.

Madness - How much is being spent on this trial and will the ex wife pick up the costs for this debacle?

What about her Child Support Back payments since she left the children and husband?

Jeff, Surrey, UK

If this woman left her husband for the other man, why doesn't that other man take care of her financial needs?

Anand Sharma, Coventry, West Midlands

Why on earth should a husband owe his wife anything at all after a divorce, or vice versa? Each party should take out of a marriage, whatever they brought in. If she brought in e.g. 20% of the value of their home in savings, dowry etc then she should then receive 20% of the proceeds of the sale of the house. If she also worked and paid toward the mortgage out of her own earnings then she should be entitled to more of the proceeds.
Women who choose not to work and contribute financially to the home have only themselves to blame if they then fall on hard times after a divorce. It should teach them that they can't expect to rely financially on a man in life. In this case, there is no logic in the former husband paying this woman anything, not even in the inital settlement. She choose to have an affair and betray the marriage and she is therefore at fault and owed nothing. When are courts going to start updating divorce laws to reflect the 21st century instead of the 19th?

MB, Edinburgh,

Thank goodness the Court of Appeal had the sense to overturn the original judgement.

I wonder how Judge Greene would have acted had he been in Mr. North's shoes?

Pat Thornton, Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria

How ludicrous that the appeal judges should find that her absurd claim is worth even the slightest consideration. She left the marriage, she agreed the settlement, she made bad decisions and yet he has to continue to pay 30 years later. If she is awarded anything you can be sure that there is going to be a flood of claims from divorcees who have jumped into hard times and see their ex spouses as a way to get them back "in the money."
Wherever did the idea of taking responsibility for oneself disappear to?

S Zucker, La Bastide de Besplas, France