Judge rules in favor of estranged husband in Swedish millionaire divorce case

Following the breakdown of their six-year marriage, a judge has instructed a Swedish businesswoman valued at about £250 million to provide her estranged husband with more than £6.5 million.

Louise Backstrom and Martin Wennberg, both in their 30s, have been engaged in a finance dispute within a London private family court.

Mr. Wennberg sought a financial settlement exceeding £40 million, but Deputy High Court judge Leslie Samuels ruled against his demands.

Judge Samuels, responsible for hearings in the Family Division of the High Court at the Royal Courts of Justice, examined evidence during a recent private trial.

He detailed his findings in a written judgment, naming all involved parties.

Judge Samuels stated that Ms. Backstrom proposed a £6.5 million ‘housing fund’ in accordance with the terms of a pre-marital agreement, which he affirmed should be given full consideration.

He also ruled that Ms. Backstrom should provide about £60,000 annually for the next six years to meet Mr. Wennberg’s income needs.

According to the judge, Ms. Backstrom, 33, and Mr. Wennberg, 39, are Swedish but had been residing in England.

Ms. Backstrom was identified as the chairman of the Biltema Foundation and a minority shareholder in Birgma Holdings (Hong Kong) Limited, a family business established and managed by her grandfather, the judge noted.

It was concluded that Ms. Backstrom held assets valued at approximately £250 million, while Mr. Wennberg’s assets were estimated at £2 million.

‘The parties met in Stockholm and formed a relationship in March 2012,’ the judge mentioned. ‘When they met, the wife was a student and the husband was working selling luxury watches.’

Their cohabitation began in 2014, marriage in 2015, and separation in 2021.

‘The standard of living enjoyed by this family before the breakdown of the marriage was extremely high,’ the judge commented. ‘The parties enjoyed the provision of high-value London properties, staff, expensive holidays, limitless travel options, and, overall, the best that money can provide.’

Regarding Mr. Wennberg, the judge noted that he ‘filed no evidence’ and did not provide ‘any disclosure of his financial position.’

Mr. Wennberg was found to be in breach of orders requiring him to provide financial information.

Details of the dispute emerged in March, with Ms. Backstrom accusing Mr. Wennberg of breaching court orders and being in contempt.

She requested another judge to impose a jail sentence.

Mr. Justice Peel, who reviewed Ms. Backstrom’s complaint, ruled in favor of her claims that Mr. Wennberg had breached earlier court orders.

A judge is scheduled to make sentencing decisions later this year.

ncG1vNJzZmimlazAr7vWp6CgnaKerm%2B6xmihrpyXmnqzwcueqmahnmKzosLOq2Sonl2awLW%2BwKeenpxdncK0rsCnm2ahnmLAuLHDoqqhZZ2eua21zqeYoqqVYrGqws6rmp5lk5bApns%3D