The author of this article is Joanna Toloczko is a partner and head of the family team at . The editors are pleased to share these insights on such a case; the usual editorial disclaimers apply to views of guest writers. As ever, if you have comments or suggestions, email the editors at tom.burroughes@wealthbriefing.com and amanda.cheesley@clearviewpublishing.com

The final decision in the divorce case of Mr and Mrs Gohil was at last published in May, ending what is believed to be England’s longest-running divorce case. The litigation spanned almost 24 years and involved the Crown Prosecution Service. 

In April 2004, Mrs Gohil agreed to settle her divorce claims for a lump sum of £270,000 together with maintenance for herself and the children. In 2007, she applied to set aside the original order on the basis that her husband had significantly failed to disclose his assets. After years of extensive litigation, her application was eventually successful, and her financial claims were reheard 18 years later. 

In the meantime, Mr Gohil was convicted of money laundering and fraud, sentenced to 10 years imprisonment and made subject to confiscation proceedings.   

Many of Mr Gohil’s assets were held in the names of third parties, including family members, companies and offshore entities. Mrs Gohil argued that those assets belonged to her husband. The judge agreed with her with regard to a number of the assets. The judge had to balance her claim against the claims of the Crown Prosecution Service who sought the confiscation of assets derived from criminal activities.   

The judge awarded Mrs Gohil assets valued at over £6.6 million which comprised the entirety of the assets which could be identified as “untainted” by the husband’s criminal conduct. 

Aside from the scale of the award and the remarkable duration of the case, it highlights a serious challenge in divorce proceedings: identifying the true extent of a spouse’s wealth, which remains a prominent feature in many cases. It also emphasises the risks and consequences of failing to provide full and frank disclosure. 

Financial disclosure
As financial arrangements have become increasingly sophisticated, opportunities to conceal assets have also evolved. Wealth can now be held through complex corporate structures, offshore entities and digital assets, making it more difficult to identify and value. Cryptocurrency has introduced a new dimension to asset tracing, as holdings can be transferred and stored outside traditional banking systems. A recent survey by the Financial Conduct Authority found that over two million people in the UK now hold cryptocurrency.

There are many steps which can be taken to establish an accurate overview of a person’s wealth.  

The first step is that both spouses are required to complete an extensive financial document (known as a Form E) with information regarding their personal and financial circumstances. They must also produce supporting documentation to verify the information disclosed. 

They may then produce a questionnaire regarding the contents of the other spouse’s Form E and supporting documents. As long as the questions asked are relevant and proportionate, it is likely that the judge will order them to reply. These steps are standard parts of the court procedure. 

In more complex cases, it may be necessary to instruct a private investigator to uncover hidden assets.  A forensic accountant may be instructed to look at personal or company accounts or bank statements to identify suspicious transactions or patterns of behaviour which are designed to obscure the true value of assets. Contrary to popular belief, cryptocurrency is not beyond scrutiny; experts can use blockchain analytics to trace transactions and identify digital assets.  

If a spouse denies that an asset belongs to them and asserts that it is owned by a trust or a family member, for example, it is possible to obtain orders joining the trustees or family members as parties to the court proceedings and ordering them to disclose relevant information and documents. They may also be required to give evidence at hearings and will then be subject to cross-examination.

Despite all these tools, it remains difficult to unearth cash deposits. It is also tricky to establish the true value of a business if it involves many cash transactions. 

It is important that those involved in divorce proceedings do not resort to self-help measures such as taking confidential documents belonging to their spouse without consent or hacking into their computer records. This type of action is likely to be criticised by the court and may amount to a criminal offence. An injunction could be sought requiring the return of the documents and all copies, prohibiting the use of the information discovered and possibly seeking damages and costs. 

The role of wealth advisors 
If there is a concern that one party may be hiding assets during divorce proceedings, it is important to seek legal advice at an early stage. A range of procedural tools are available to help uncover incomplete or inaccurate financial disclosure, from targeted requests for information to court applications where necessary. However, while these measures can be highly effective in identifying discrepancies, they cannot guarantee that every hidden asset will be discovered.

Advisors also play an important role in identifying potential warning signs and ensuring that their clients understand their disclosure obligations. However, they must remain alert to the limits of their role: they cannot assist with concealing assets, misrepresenting financial information, or circumventing the disclosure process. Where concerns arise, advisors should encourage transparency and recommend appropriate legal advice to ensure that the financial settlement process is fair and compliant.