Mrs Miller, 36, an American born PR executive, was married to fund manager Alan Miller for two years, nine months, after a four-year engagement. It ended after Mr Miller met another woman.
Initial ruling: Mr Miller was ordered to pay off the mortgage on their £2.3m home and hand it to his wife, and give her a £2.7m lump sum. He appealed,
New award: Mrs Miller can keep the £5m.
Mrs McFarlane, 46, a City solicitor, was married to tax accountant Kenneth McFarlane for 16 years. She gave up her career following the birth of her three children in 1991.
Initial ruling: Given the couple's £1.5m home and £250,000 a year for five years in 2001. Mr McFarlane appealed and this was reduced to £180,000 a year.
New award: £250,000 a year for life.
in the Guardian
The Times says "all couples were advised last night to sign prenuptial agreements before getting married". Family lawyers, it says, argue that wealthy young men and women would be better off not getting married at all after the court ruled that a wife may be entitled to up to half the assets created during even a short marriage
Report in the Times
The Financial Times, perhaps sensing that the story will interest many among its high-earning readership, devotes considerable space to the ruling. "For the first time the court said that compensation should be one of the three guiding principles in determining a fair financial settlement when a marriage ends; for example, to a wife who has given up her career prospects in order to look after the home and children. The other principles were needs and a presumption that the fruits of the marriage should be shared equally, unless there was good reason to the contrary."
Amanda Platell, writing in the Mail, believes the lords' decision was "shamefully short-sighted" and that women will ultimately will pay a high price. "The pendulum has swung too far," she writes, and the law is now being interpreted in such a way "that it is becoming grossly unfair to men". Men fear that they are "little more than walking wallets for life".