Star's wife wins divorce payout

The former wife of Arsenal star Ray Parlour today won the right to a share of his future income.

It is likely to change the face of divorce law in this country because it

means husbands, or high-earning wives, could be forced to hand over not only half their assets but up to half of their future salaries as well.

The victory for Karen Parlour could

also leave the footballer with a bill for £1million in legal costs. Mrs Parlour, 34, argued that wives in her position should be paid half their ex-husband's earnings.

She said that Parlour, 31, owed his career to her efforts to drag him back from the brink of alcoholism. A High Court ruling last year ordered Parlour to pay her £250,000 a year maintenance, a lump sum of £250,000 plus the £1 million family home in Hornchurch and a holiday home in Norfolk.

The footballer was also told to pay £12,500 a year for each of the three children, aged eight, six and four.

Mrs Parlour based her appeal on the principle of a 50-50 split for ex-wives in her position. But she accepted a 37 per cent share of his £1.2 million-a-year earnings because of the relatively short time they had been together.

In his Appeal Court judgment today Lord Justice Thorpe, sitting with Lord Justice Latham and Lord Justice Wall, awarded her £444,000 a year for herself and her children.

This breaks down as £406,500 for Mrs Parlour and £12,500 for each of their three children.

This figure would last for four years until Parlour would be 35 when a new assessment would be made.

The judge accepted that Parlour was approaching the end of his career, was injury prone and his current Arsenal contract was due to run out next year.

But other clubs are said to be keen to sign him. Mrs Parlour said on hearing the news: "I am very relieved at the outcome of the appeal. However, it has been a difficult and stressful time for all of us."

Mrs Parlour's legal advisers, the law firm Clintons, added: "This judgment clarifies a hitherto uncertain area of the law. It will enable both parties to make provision for the future rather than only the earning party having that option.

"However, it must be emphasised that this judgment will apply in only a very limited number of cases, where the family's income is so high that there is a substantial surplus left after both parties' reasonable income needs and those of any children have been met."