A woman who recently won a divorce award of £48 million should have been entitled to as much as £65 million, according to a leading family QC.

Beverley Charman made legal history when the Court of Appeal upheld the size of the payout from her husband, John. But James Turner, QC, told the Bar Conference that on the principle that the couple had entered their marriage with nothing, and all the wealth was accumulated during the marriage, it was arguable that Mrs Charman was entitled to not less than half of her former husband’s assets.

“So if the principle is sharing equally, why did she not get 50 per cent of his assets?” Mr Charman’s wealth was estimated at about £130 million, including money put into a trust fund for his children. He had argued that the trust fund should not be included in the calculation when determining his assets.

Defending Mr Charman’s position, another leading family QC, Nick Francis, said that it did not seem right that “the courts should interfere with these trusts” where they were not found to be a “sham” to avoid liability.

From fat cats to human rights: how the Bar is changing

Bar Conference 2007: Public service is the ethos of the Bar, barristers reveal

• Bar Conference 2007: Programme

What do young barristers think?

Bar Conference 2007: We asked four junior advocates about the main challenges facing the Bar

• Future stars of the Bar

Mr Turner said that there was some concern that the pendulum had swung too far in favour of the wife, who could claim “equality” whatever her contribution. A “Harvey Nichols wife” who contributed little to a marriage could, therefore, also receive 50 per cent of her husband’s assets.

Britain’s most senior family judge, Sir Mark Potter, said recently that there should be a review of the law on the division of assets. Sir Mark said that there was “growing dissatisfaction” about awards in big money cases and the fact that Britain was out of step with Europe. Mr Charman had argued that the £20 million he had offered his wife was “more than enough” because she had been a housewife.

The leader of the barristers’ profession has started a drive to end its “fat cat” image and win recognition similar to that of teachers and medics. Geoffrey Vos, QC, chairman of the Bar, said: “Perhaps 50 per cent of barristers undertake publicly funded work for relatively modest fees. They should be recognised as public servants.”

Explore Law

• Corporate Law

• Public Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Student Law

• Law Reports

Times Recommends

• Iranian bank challenges EU sanctions
• Lord Falconer to join Gibson Dunn
• A Judge by name is new Lord Chief Justice