"No, you shouldn't, Mr. Ecotricity. You spent the last 20 years not contributing a PENNY to your kids - leeching utterly off this woman"
Have you read the judgement? This is not accurate. He had A kid, who he looked after at various points, and at one point sued for custody, which failed.
"who DIDN'T have the free time, headspace or lack of commitment to get the chance to do anything near becoming an entrepreneur and making a million. While you were doing that, she funded YOUR children"
No, this is not right either. She didn't fund her children, she was living on benefits, and moreover he didn't become an entrepreneur until his one son was 14, at which point he really wouldn't have been that much of an impediment.
Moreover it sounds like both their lifestyles were pretty chaotic, in that he took his son travelling in a caravan when he was one year old for a year, so it really isn't clear how much that interfered with his general tinkering.
"This story has really angered me - not least because it's disgusting that she should even have to ask. Yes, Mr Green, Mr doing great stuff for humanity - pity he couldn't look at the human being that's poured her energy into the OTHER assets he now enjoys and say 'hey, you know, by rights - if I'm going to look at my life as a whole and the good stuff I have - half of this cash belongs to you.'"
A child is not an asset as such. Not unless perhaps he has special skills, say for instance the mother devoted her life to teaching him advanced mathematics, which enabled him to invent something wonderful.
There's no evidence of that here. The son, it seems, works for the father for purely nepotistic reasons, and the evidence suggests that his upbringing with his mother was pretty chaotic, and there's no particular reason to believe that she 'poured her energy' into him as such - certainly not all parents do.
"NOBODY would even think, in a MILLION years, to say to Mr. Eco - 'Hang on, you split years ago. You decided to separate yourself from this family and played no part, made no contribution to creating and maintaining this amazing asset, these now adult humans who are only what they are because your ex wife made them her project. You have no right to ask to share those assets now. You are not Dad, go away.'"
You what? He has an adult son, who can choose to spend time with whomever he chooses. That is not 'an asset'. It's an adult with free will.
Fundamentally speaking, a child will, by and large, grow up and become an adult. This process of raising it is not of itself rocket science. Children might have horrific upbringings but they still survive - it's not something that is deserving of millions of pounds of itself.
"Yet in reverse - when the child carer says, hey - you've only got those monetary assets AND the benefit of having children, grandchildren, a family, because I did it all - oh nooooo, the cash Mr. Big makes because he's not finishing work at 3pm because he has to get to the school - no, you've no right to that! All mine! And yes, the kids are half mine too. Me human rights, innit?"
But he never worked that kind of job where you needed to stay till 7pm. He didn't build a career in a firm of solicitors or something. He just went around being a hippie/new age traveller/protester, tinkering with old vehicles, and when his son was 14 he bought a windmill.
So her contribution truly was nothing.
Not every man is in a job where he relies on his wife for childcare.
"I couldn't disagree more with your OP, and I hope she gets a good payout."
It's always a good idea to read the facts before commenting.