It is time for a debate on what constitutes 'equality'. For too long, the courts have been ruling in favour of women in the name of 'equality' whether that be in the case of employment or family law.

simon, York, England

Does this indicate that 'the public interest' has become 'what interests the public'?

Tim Harrison, London,

Sorry, but since Paul was silly enough not have had a pre-nup he has to pay now. Heather needs money for security/protection, because I believe people are nutty enough to want to kill her, and it's esp. important if Bea will be staying with her. And I think H would have a hard time finding work now, because of her reputation. Having said that I wouldn't make it extravagent; if I owned a home (as I think H does?), I think I could do quite nicely on 20-30 mil pounds (not counting B's care). I also think Paul should compromise on the confidentiality. Do what they did w/Bowie's 1st wife, she couldn't write a book for 10 years or so after the divorce, by which time it got coverage but not nearly as much as it would have at the time. But H might take less money if she knew she could write something in 10 years. I BET she appeals whatever the judge decides though, because at the next level it'll be public!

Diane, Petaluma,

No wonder marriage in the Uk is on the decline..what is the upside of it for ANYONE, man or woman - who has greater assets than the other party? The law is barking mad on this.

Jim MHK, London, UK

Definition of prostitution-Payment received for sexual services ,funny enough this also applies to alimony payments.You would think that women these days would have more self respect.

david collier, lisse, netherlands

There is no basis in Law in the UK for a prenuptial agreement.
I agree that the law needs to be reformed, but that will never happen while we have a Govt who are interested only in sound bite politics. They announce 'New' action plans on an almost daily basis to try to fool the public into thinking they are doing something. The truth is they pander to their own pet projects while lining their pockets and those of their friends. A lot of MPs come from a Law background (sometimes their wives too) they are not going to legislate in favour of anything which reduces lawyers or barristers earnings. Men should 'Just say No!' as suggested by Wendy.

Terry, Watford, UK

Personally I hope that Mr Justice Bennett awards her a well considered settlement, but one less than she anticipates - prompting her to a appeal.
I understand that should the appeal judges dismiss her further assertions, then the costs of all legal representations become her sole liability..........hence and as a consequence, further eroding her initial award.
Since knowing her only by media reputation, I wouldn't know where to put money on!

Robbie Rohan, Great Chart, Kent, UK

I believe that Ms Mills should be awarded whatever she had at the time of this marriage PLUS a fair and sensible amount for child support..
Anything else would be a travesty of justice.

Sylvia.Livonia,Michigan .U.S.A.

SYLVIA WEBB, LIVONIA, MICHIGAN U.S.A.

I divorced my wife, got custody of our nine year-old boy, and she has to pay *me* alamony. You don't hear of many cases like this one do you ?

Jett Hansen, Seattle, U.S.A.

Pre-nups are unenforceable in Britain.

Sarah, Coventry,

Why does she think that she is entitled to money that Paul made before he married her?
The current system is broken when there is even a chance that this could happen.

Men are always painted as the bad guys in these situations. When was the last time you heard of a man trying to get his hands on his ex-wife's fortune. It never happens.

Should have signed that pre-nub Paul.

Andy Duffield, Eugene , USA

Sir Paul is paying a steep price for his belief in the romantic nonsense of his lyrics.

MARK KLEIN, M.D., OAKLAND, CA

Paul McCartney should have signed a prenuptual agreement before marrying her as it would have saved him all the hassle he's getting now.

Marie-Claire Oliver, Bath, United Kingdom

There is however the matter of the child - why should she suffer on account of her parents falling out. There is also the small misjudgement of Macca's in not getting a pre-nup of some sort. Sad that, by all accounts he's normally prudently Liverpudlian.

ROHAN, Solihull, UK

If men or women don't want to share 'their' money, they simply should not get married. Don't make an oath to share all your worldly goods and then try and back out of it. Just say NO.

wendy, bergerac, france

There's a world of difference between "in the public interest" and "some members of the public are interested".

This falls firmly into the latter category.

Personally, I would find it hard to care less...

Paul, New Forest,

Hopefully this case will highligt for the public how completely biased the divorce process is in this country towards women. It is merely a process and not law as a civilised country would recognise. There is no account taken of of a womans actions leading up to the separation but women can use things from earlier in the marriage, e.g. any time they decided to stay at home with children against a husband, even if he is looking after the children now.

We need reform of the divorce system in this country and we need to remove the judge from it. A simple computer program can do a better job and at much less cost to all the parties involved.

David, Aylesbury,

Heather should be returned by the courts to the financial status she held before she married Sir Paul. There should be no question of her recieving any form of enhancement from the situation and certainly none of her former husbands wealth.

A firm ruling such as this might deter other gold diggers in future.

Stephen, Cambridge, England