By . Amie Keeley . PUBLISHED: . 14:26 EST, 18 December 2013 . | . UPDATED: . 20:47 EST, 18 December 2013 . The ex-wife of a software entrepreneur claims he conned her out of an equal share of his £150million fortune. Alison Sharland, 46, says she was misled by ex-husband Charlie, 53, about the value of his business when they divorced last year after 17 years together. At the time she accepted a £10million settlement – but now wants the case reopened so she can get a larger settlement. Battle: Alison Sharland, left, has asked the Court of Appeal to let her re-open divorce proceedings against her ex-husband Charlie Sharland, right, amid claims he misled her over the value of his software company . The Court of Appeal heard the . self-made millionaire claimed his shares were worth £7million, whereas . press reports suggested the company could be floated on the stockmarket . for more than £460million. Mrs . Sharland’s barrister, Patrick Chamberlayne QC, said the couple had been . equal partners in the marriage and that the divorce settlement was . supposed to be the same. ‘She was cheated into an agreement,’ said the . QC. ‘If someone dupes you into a deal, why should you be held to a deal? ‘This . was a case of equality. It was a long marriage. All the assets had been . acquired during the course of the marriage and each party had made . their full contribution. ‘Part . of the wife’s case was that she was busy making post-separation efforts . as well. She had the unusual task of lifelong care of the parties’ disabled child.’ The couple, . who lived in Wilmslow, Cheshire, married in 1993 and had built a . substantial fortune before separating in 2010. Mr Sharland ran his . company, Appsense, from a business park in Daresbury, near Warrington, . while Mrs Sharland ran an autism charity. On . divorce, they agreed the assets should be split equally, but the couple . came to legal blows over the valuation of Mr Sharland’s shares in his . business. Court: The judges heard the case at the Court of Appeal, which sits in the Royal Courts of Justice in London, pictured . Accountants for Mrs Sharland valued them at £32million, but those working for her husband said they were worth just £7million. During . divorce proceedings last year they agreed to compromise, with Mrs . Sharland giving up her claim to an equal share of the firm. She . received £10.4million in cash and property and agreed to take only 30 . per cent of the proceeds from shares when they were put on the . stockmarket. Mr Chamberlayne said she based her agreement on the value . of the shares being worth no more than £32million and that the company . would not be floated for up to seven years. But . it soon emerged that Mr Sharland was already in the process of floating . the company. With an estimated value of more than £460million, it would . mean Mr Sharland’s shares were worth at least £132million after tax, . the QC explained. Mrs Sharland took her case to the Court of Appeal . after family judge, Sir Hugh Bennett, despite finding Mr Sharland’s . evidence to have been ‘dishonest’, refused to reopen his ex-wife’s . financial claims. Mr . Sharland does not dispute that he misled his ex-wife, but says the final . order made by Sir Hugh was a fair one and should stand. A judgment will be made next year.
Alison Sharland, 46, was married to software entrepreneur Charlie, 53 .
Mr Sharland has a large shareholding in AppSense, a company he founded .
When the pair divorced last year, Mrs Sharland agreed to accept less than half of the available shares in the company, said to be worth £7million .
But later reports claimed the shares could be worth as much as £132million .
Mrs Sharland has asked the Court of Appeal to let her re-open the divorce .
By . Amie Keeley . PUBLISHED: . 14:26 EST, 18 December 2013 . | . UPDATED: . 20:47 EST, 18 December 2013 . The ex-wife of a software entrepreneur claims he conned her out of an equal share of his £150million fortune. Alison Sharland, 46, says she was misled by ex-husband Charlie, 53, about the value of his business when they divorced last year after 17 years together. At the time she accepted a £10million settlement – but now wants the case reopened so she can get a larger settlement. Battle: Alison Sharland, left, has asked the Court of Appeal to let her re-open divorce proceedings against her ex-husband Charlie Sharland, right, amid claims he misled her over the value of his software company . The Court of Appeal heard the . self-made millionaire claimed his shares were worth £7million, whereas . press reports suggested the company could be floated on the stockmarket . for more than £460million. Mrs . Sharland’s barrister, Patrick Chamberlayne QC, said the couple had been . equal partners in the marriage and that the divorce settlement was . supposed to be the same. ‘She was cheated into an agreement,’ said the . QC. ‘If someone dupes you into a deal, why should you be held to a deal? ‘This . was a case of equality. It was a long marriage. All the assets had been . acquired during the course of the marriage and each party had made . their full contribution. ‘Part . of the wife’s case was that she was busy making post-separation efforts . as well. She had the unusual task of lifelong care of the parties’ disabled child.’ The couple, . who lived in Wilmslow, Cheshire, married in 1993 and had built a . substantial fortune before separating in 2010. Mr Sharland ran his . company, Appsense, from a business park in Daresbury, near Warrington, . while Mrs Sharland ran an autism charity. On . divorce, they agreed the assets should be split equally, but the couple . came to legal blows over the valuation of Mr Sharland’s shares in his . business. Court: The judges heard the case at the Court of Appeal, which sits in the Royal Courts of Justice in London, pictured . Accountants for Mrs Sharland valued them at £32million, but those working for her husband said they were worth just £7million. During . divorce proceedings last year they agreed to compromise, with Mrs . Sharland giving up her claim to an equal share of the firm. She . received £10.4million in cash and property and agreed to take only 30 . per cent of the proceeds from shares when they were put on the . stockmarket. Mr Chamberlayne said she based her agreement on the value . of the shares being worth no more than £32million and that the company . would not be floated for up to seven years. But . it soon emerged that Mr Sharland was already in the process of floating . the company. With an estimated value of more than £460million, it would . mean Mr Sharland’s shares were worth at least £132million after tax, . the QC explained. Mrs Sharland took her case to the Court of Appeal . after family judge, Sir Hugh Bennett, despite finding Mr Sharland’s . evidence to have been ‘dishonest’, refused to reopen his ex-wife’s . financial claims. Mr . Sharland does not dispute that he misled his ex-wife, but says the final . order made by Sir Hugh was a fair one and should stand. A judgment will be made next year.
Charlie, 53, about the value of his business when they divorced last year after 17 years together. a larger settlement. Battle: Alison Sharland, left, has asked the Court of Appeal to let her re-open divorce proceedings against her he misled her over the value of his software worth £7million, whereas . press reports suggested the company could be floated on the shares in his . business. Court: The judges heard divorce proceedings last year they agreed to agreement on the value . of the shares being years. But . it soon emerged that Mr Sharland was