A top City lawyer is locked in a court battle with her banker ex-husband’s mother over ownership of a luxury holiday home in Panama.
International finance law specialist Melanie Panzone, 48, was married to Jonathan Read for 14 years until their split in 2016, and they have already fought each other in the divorce courts over the division of their finances.
But Ms Panzone, who works at the Moorgate offices of law firm Simmons and Simmons, is back in court facing off against her former mother-in-law Anne Read over the beachside apartment in Panama.
Mrs Read, 73, says the holiday home is hers — solely owned through a company — and was bought for her by her son in “gratitude for her support when he was growing up”.
But Ms Panzone insists the property in the Rio Mar resort is owned by her ex-husband, and should be among the assets divided in the divorce.
Last year, a judge ruled in her favour, finding that Mr Read, 45, is the “sole beneficial owner of the Panama property”, which is valued at £300,000.
But Mrs Read is now asking the Court of Appeal to overturn that decision and hand the apartment back to her. The court heard Ms Panzone and Mr Read lived together in rented accommodation in south London during their marriage, and he was earning more than £1 million a year when the Panama apartment was bought in 2007.
Mrs Justice Parker said Mr Read was “earning extremely well” and “wanted to provide a holiday home for his mother in gratitude for her support of him when he was growing up”.
But she concluded that the banker had actually held on to ownership of the flat, upholding a district judge’s original findings on the case.
Appealing against the decision, Michael Horton, for Mrs Read, said the district judge’s ruling was “tainted” and argued the judgment shows a “degree of confusion”.
But Christopher Hames, for Ms Panzone, said that both judges who previously heard the case had focused on the correct issues. “The main target of my client was to show that the husband was the true financial beneficial owner of the Panamanian property,” he said.
“This property was the husband’s, is the husband’s, and should be treated as the husband’s. That is how Mrs Justice Parker analysed the district judge’s findings.
“I respectfully submit she was absolutely right. The fundamental finding was that this was the husband’s property.”
Lady Justice King, Lord Justice Moylan and Lord Justice Leggatt will give a final ruling on the case at a later date.
