Conran superwives turn Sir Terence into a multi-million pound loser

He is a man of immense wealth who has shaped the way we live now. The British Prime Minister and the American President chose his restaurant to eat during a state visit. But when it comes to his personal life, Sir Terence Conran appears to have an expensive habit of losing wives.

Yesterday at the High Court he was ordered to pay a pounds 10.5m settlement to his latest ex-wife. Writer and journalist Caroline was the third woman to have married and then left Sir Terence.

However, like a previous incumbent of the role, Shirley Conran, the renowned author of "Superwoman", she has emerged from the partnership a successful figure in her own right.

Lady Caroline, 58, had asked for a cash pay-out of pounds 8.7m. Sir Terence, 68, had offered pounds 2.5m, claiming most of his pounds 80m fortune had been created after the marriage ended.

But Mr Justice Wilson decreed Lady Caroline should receive pounds 6.2m in cash, as well as a pounds 1.1m home in Belgravia, another pounds 800,000 home in Dorset and pounds 400,000 worth of jewellery, cars and other items. Money she retains from her marriage brings the total to pounds 10.5m.

In a public judgment delivered after a private hearing, the judge said he had taken into account the contribution made by Lady Caroline not only to the family, but to the Conran empire during the 30-year marriage - something Sir Terence with his "healthy ego" had difficulty in recognising.

Mr Justice Wilson described Lady Caroline as "a beautiful, creative, energetic and instinctively stylish woman". She had married Sir Terence when she was 22 and he was 29. She was "neither grasping nor dishonest", and her contribution was " in every sense outstanding".

Lady Caroline was one of the four principal founders of the furnishing chain Habitat, and had forsaken her own career to work for the first shop.

Sir Terence had conceded that his ex-wife had been an excellent mother and had "provided him with what he calls active home support", but disputed her contribution to his success, said the judge.

He continued: "He is, in my judgement, totally convinced that the wife has made no such contributions and that any award against him constructed even part by reference to them would be perverse.

"But it can be difficult for for a man with a healthy ego who has achieved vertiginous success to look down and discern a contribution other than his own".

But ..."when everything is added together there is only one conclusion - the wife's energy was almost as prodigious as that of the husband; and her contribution to the welfare of the family in every sense was outstanding".