Should it be a 50/50 split with no children?

If the wife has been earning twice as much as the man for the last 5 years and put more into the house, then when the house is sold - should the wife not be entitled to more than 50%.

He could have earnt more if he worked harder but liked the easy life and enjoyed the life he had with the wife bringing in the most.

Hi,
The short answer is no, or more accurately it depends, the fact that you were earning more is to an extent irrelevant because you were married. If you post the details below a wise wikipeep can offer some thoughts on what a fair settlement would be.

Your respective ages;

The number of children you have and their ages;

How many nights the children spend with each parent;

The length of your marriage and any period of pre marriage cohabitation;

Your respective incomes;

Your respective outgoings;

Your assets - both soley held and joint;

Your liabilities

LB

A lot is going to depend on the length of the marriage/cohabitation.

Unless it is a short, childless mmarriage, the first consideration would be need. Ideally you each need a one bed property. If one party is a higher earner and could get a bigger mortgage, they may end up with less equity.

Having said that, there is an expectation that income should be maximised. This may mean that if someone has worked part time, they would be expected to seek full time employment. However, if what you are talking about is someone who has just not climbed a career ladder and has worked only basic full time hours, I don't think that argument would have much weight.

Will the equity plus your respective mortgage capabilities allow you each to purchase a one bed property? If the answer is yes and there is cash left over, there may be a case for arguing contributions.

There will be other factors to consider including pensions if you have them.

Hadenoughnow