Ruler of Dubai, Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, has been ordered by a British court to pay up to $730 million to his former wife, Princess Haya bint Hussein, in settlement.
The payment is to cover divorce settlement as well as several intrusion and threats to Ms Haya’s privacy and security, which according to UK judge, Justice Moor, was masterminded by Mr al-Maktoum, who is the prime minister of the United Arab Emirates and an ally to Britain.
The High Court ruling published on Tuesday is an attempt to a draw a line under a sulphurous and eye-wateringly expensive divorce battle in which English judges have made a succession of extraordinary findings against the sheikh, who is also the prime minister of the United Arab Emirates.
They include that he authorised the hacking of the phones of Princess Haya, 47, and five of her acquaintances’ phones, including two of her lawyers using Pegasus spyware, a powerful Israeli-developed eavesdropping software supposedly sold solely to governments.
Also, the Dubai Ruler also “ordered and orchestrated” the abduction and forced return to Dubai of two of his adult daughters – Princess Latifa and Princess Shamsa – the latter from the streets of Cambridge – between 2000 and 2018 and subjecting Ms Haya to an “intimidation” campaign.
In a further finding, it was established that the sheikh’s associates sought to buy a £30m estate next door the Berkshire home of Princess Haya, who is the daughter of the former King Hussein of Jordan.
In Tuesday’s ruling, Mr Justice Moor said the princess, who was her 72-year-old husband’s sixth and youngest wife, faced a “clear and ever-present” risk for the rest of her life and the same applied to her children until they reached adulthood.
However, while underlining the princess’s need for “watertight security” against the risk of terrorism or other external dangers, the judge ruled that the “main threat” to her and her children came from Dubai’s billionaire ruler.
Mr Moor said;
Most importantly in this regard, and absolutely uniquely, the main threat they face is from HH (his highness the sheikh) himself not from outside sources. This is compounded by the full weight of the state that he has available to him as seen by his ability to make use of the Pegasus software, which is only available to governments.
Mr Al Maktoum will now bear up to seven hundred and thirty million dollars in security cost for his ex-wife and costs for the children upkeep and education.
The amount to be received by Princess Haya’s children could go up or down according to factors including whether they eventually reconcile with their father. But the total settlement is very likely to surpass the £450m awarded to a Russian national, Tatiana Akhmedova, by the English courts in 2016.
Princess Haya left UAE early in 2019, claiming she was terrified of her ex-husband. The High Court has heard how she claimed to have been blackmailed by four of her staff after the discovery of her affair with one her bodyguards, an ex-British Army serviceman.
Sheikh Mohammed published a poem, entitled “You Lived, You Died”, perceived to be threat to Princess Haya and since withdrawn, after he learned of the affair.
The court heard that Princess Haya had not sought a financial award for herself beyond the cost of her security. She alleged she had sold jewellery in order to pay off her blackmailers, eventually handing over £6.4m.
Princess Haya was also criticised for elements of her lavish spending, including the fact she had given her schoolboy son three luxury cars for his birthday.
The settlement to the princess, who also has a home close to Kensington Palace in central London, includes £5.6m to paid annually for each of her children for maintenance, a sum which will continue to be paid after they finish university to cover their security.
Mr Justice Moor referred to the “remarkable standard of living” enjoyed by the sheikh’s children, saying the case and its financial implications were “entirely out of the ordinary”.
Following the ruling, a spokesman for Sheikh Mohammed said;
He has always ensured that his children are provided for. The court has now made its ruling on finances and he does not intend to comment further.
