Willenhall fashion boss battles ex-wife over multi-million pound fortune

Glen Briers was working full-time as a teacher when he started up his sports and streetwear empire in the garage of the family home in 1988 with just £81 of his own money.

By the time he split with fellow teacher Nicola Briers in 2002, after 18 years of marriage and three children, the business was turning over £1m a year.

It has since grown into a major fashion chain, incorporating well-known brands Lambretta and Vision Streetwear, and turning over up to £30m.

When the couple divorced, Mr Briers, 61, of Willenhall, gave his wife, 58, £150,000 to pay off the mortgage and let her keep their £700,000 family home, a court was told. She also got a £10,000-a-year salary, plus child maintenance - but he kept the business.

Mr Briers says they made a 'verbal agreement' at the time that the 'settlement' would represent a clean break between them. But, after her relationship with her new partner broke down, Mrs Briers went to the divorce courts asking for more.

And a judge found she deserved a £2.7m slice of his £10m fortune last year.

Mr Briers is now asking the Court of Appeal to overturn his ex-wife's 'windfall', claiming it was unfair on him and left her 'in a position which is excessively favourable.'

Lady Justice Rafferty heard that Mr and Mrs Briers married in 1984 and have three children who are now grown up.

Whilst some teachers are ridiculed by pupils over their embarrassing fashion sense, Mr Briers proved he was more hip than most.

His company, Lydenford Ltd, became a roaring sucess and now comprises a ski & sportswear business as well as "young fashion" brands, Vision and Lambretta.

In 2002 the couple separated and Mr Briers left the matrimonial home. They were divorced in 2005.

He says there was an agreement to make a clean break and that divorce judge, Mark Rogers, was wrong to treat the business as 'an undivided matrimonial asset.'

Jonathan Cohen QC, for Mr Briers, told the Appeal Court it was unfair for him to now have to share the fruits of his hard work over a decade after the split.

"The husband started the business with just £81 of his own money," said the barrister.

"No family money went into the business at all...the wife's involvement in the business was negligible.

He said: "The judge has provided the wife with a windfall which has no logical justification. It places her in a position which in all the circumstances is excessively favourable."

Justin Warshaw QC, for Mrs Briers, insisted the payout should be allowed to stand, and that no legal settlement between the former couple had ever been finalised.

"The husband paid her £150,000 and the matrimonial home was transferred, but this was not in satisfaction of a completed agreement...no agreement was ever reached," he told the court. The whole process, he claimed, was 'dictated by the husband.'.

"At no time did the wife accept these proposals," he said.

He said Mrs Briers deserved her share of the family fortune, due to her "huge contribution" in caring for the children.

Lady Justice Rafferty, Lord Justice Lindblom and Sir Ernest Ryder reserved their decision on Mr Briers' appeal and will give their ruling at a later date.