Beautician and dentist in £1.8m inheritance battle after both married same man in Las Vegas

Yahoo

4 days ago

A beautician and a dentist are locked in an inheritance battle over a dead accountant's £1.8m fortune after he married both of them in Las Vegas five years apart - but failed to get a divorce from his first bride.
Wealthy accountant James Dinsdale died of cancer, aged 55, in October 2020, leaving a £1.8million estate to be fought over by the two women who called themselves his wives.
After his death, his most recent partner, beautician Margaret Dinsdale, 41, began sorting out his affairs on the assumption that she would inherit his fortune as his next of kin.
But she was left reeling when she discovered James was still legally married to his first wife when he whisked her off for a Las Vegas wedding in 2017 - making their marriage "void" and leaving her with no automatic right to inherit.
Just five years earlier, James had married cosmetic dentist, Victoria Fowell, 53, at a Vegas wedding chapel on the same street and only 600 metres from where he wed Margaret, but never got round to divorcing her - making her James' heir alongside his adult son under intestacy laws.
However, the two women are now locked in a High Court clash after Margaret launched a claim to a share of James' money on the basis she should be treated as a "spouse" because she married him in "good faith."
In a short preliminary hearing, High Court judge Master James Brightwell heard accountant and Second World War history expert James Dinsdale built a thriving property development business, based around central London, before he died and left an estate now valued at around £1.8m.
He wed Dr Victoria Fowell - a St Albans-based dentist with an expertise in 'cosmetic smile makeovers' - in 2012, but the pair never got divorced and he went on to marry Margaret Dinsdale in 2017.
Margaret's barrister Jonathan Davey KC said his client and James had met in 2008 and become friends, before beginning a 'romantic relationship' in 2014, setting up home together the following year.
However, she had no idea whatsoever that he was still married, only learning of it after his death.
And because he had not made a will, James' money would be divided between Dr Fowell and his son, William Dinsdale, 28, under intestacy rules.
'Margaret believed that she was validly married to James Dinsdale and there is no evidence that she knew that the deceased was married to Dr Fowell as at 2017," he said.
'She understood the marriage between the deceased and Dr Fowell to have ended some time prior to the relationship between the deceased and the claimant beginning.
"We have no idea what James' state of mind was, perhaps he didn't realise he wasn't divorced.
"Margaret's assertion is that she believed the deceased to be unmarried and already divorced when she married him in good faith."
Touching on their 2017 wedding in Las Vegas, he noted: 'The ceremony which took place between James and my client took place in almost the same location, and appears to have been of the same nature, as the earlier ceremony which took place between the deceased and Victoria Fowell in June 2012.
'The marriage ceremony between him and Dr Fowell took place in the Little White Wedding Chapel, Las Vegas Boulevard. The marriage ceremony between James and Margaret took place in the Chapel of the Flowers, Las Vegas Boulevard.
'But for the deceased's prior marriage to Dr Fowell, the latter ceremony would have been a valid marriage ceremony."
The case reached court for a preliminary hearing after Margaret made a claim for "reasonable provision" from James' estate under the 1975 Inheritance Act, amounting to at least half of his £1.8m.
The case is being brought against Dr Fowell and James' adult son William, who are currently due to share his fortune as his next of kin under intestacy rules.
Mr Davey said Margaret had looked after James "24 hours per day" during his final struggles with terminal cancer and was his "primary carer."
'The evidence of his close friends is that James and Margaret had a loving relationship, and that he was very grateful for her care," he told the judge.
He said the couple had been together for six years and planned to have children, with Margaret giving up work and becoming a housewife while he provided for her.
"She and James had a relatively lavish lifestyle, which was funded by his wealth and she was entirely financially dependent on the deceased," he said.
'Dr Fowell and William Dinsdale were not being financially maintained by the deceased at the time of his death."
There was no evidence of 'financial need' on the part of Dr Fowell, claimed Mr Davey, highlighting claims by Margaret that James once told her he had transferred to her a property and a £2million lump sum after their relationship ended.
The court heard it is alleged that Margaret has already received £375,000 "from the estate or in sums derived from James," but Mr Davey said that is denied and that she has only received £20,000 from his pension.
After a brief court hearing in which he was told it was "not disputed" that Margaret should be considered a "spouse" under the 1975 Act, Master Brightwell made a declaration to that effect for the purposes of her claim against the estate.
He directed that there should now be a future hearing focusing on how James' estate should be divided up between his two wives and son.
Under the Inheritance Act, payouts to those treated as a spouse or civil partner are higher than to unmarried partners of a deceased person.
The judge also allocated cash-strapped Margaret £50,000 from the estate to help cover her bills and contribute towards hefty lawyers' bills as the case progresses - with the projected costs on her side estimated at around £175,000.