Judge says operation was a ‘need’ and therefore it was ‘reasonable’ for £160k cost to be met out of joint funds.
The mother argued that it was unfair that she had to stump up £80,000 for the procedure when the decision to transition had led to the breakdown of her marriage.
But in what is believed to be the first case of its kind, the judge said that the surgery was a “need”, not a “whim”, and therefore it was “reasonable” for the cost to be met out of their joint funds.
The husband, 58, had said that the argument was “like saying someone who had cancer should not have the surgery” during the hearing at Brighton Family Court.
The couple, who cannot be named for legal reasons, met while working in the financial sector in London in the late 1990s and married in 2002, when the husband was living as a man.
They have two children who were privately educated and are now at university.
In 2022 the husband informed his wife he was “intending to “transition to a woman” and “commenced hormone therapy at that stage”, the judge said.
Two months later the wife, 60, issued divorce proceedings.
The husband had surgery in 2024 after they had been separated for almost two years and the £160,000 bill was paid out of their joint cash.
During their separation, the husband, who has retrained as a massage therapist and Reiki practitioner, claimed he could not afford to pay the court-ordered maintenance to his wife and children but splashed £14,000 on an Amex card in one month “mainly on clothing, nails, jewellery and restaurants”, got £13,000 worth of tattoos in six months and racked up a £1,000 Milan restaurant bill.
Source: Divorcee forced to pay half of ex-husband’s trans surgery in legal first