The former wife of the Premiership footballer Ray Parlour has won her claim to more than a third of his future income in a legal landmark that could change the face of divorce law.

Karen Parlour, whose marriage to the Arsenal midfielder was dissolved in 2002, was told by the Court of Appeal today that her award of £250,000 a year personal maintenance would be increased to £406,500, to be reviewed after four years.

The award is in addition to two mortgage-free houses worth more than £1 million and a £250,000 lump sum, plus the £12,500 a year Parlour is paying for each of the children, aged eight, six and four.

The player who earns £1.2 million a year had offered his former wife £120,000 a year.

In January, the High Court Family Division judge Mr Justice Bennett awarded Mrs Parlour £250,000 annual maintenance, ruling that her former husband's offer did not reflect the major part she played in persuading him to "grow up" and drop the hard-drinking "laddish" culture that existed among some of his fellow Arsenal players.

Mrs Parlour's contributions to the development of her husband's career, as well as to the home and the care of the children, should not be played down, the judge said.

But the former optician's assistant from Romford, Essex said the maintenance was not enough and claimed she was entitled to around 37 per cent because the earning capacity her footballer husband developed with her support during their marriage and was a "matrimonial resource".

The three judges, hearing the case in the Court of Appeal, had been asked to rule that, in principle, the post-divorce income of a high-earning spouse should be split 50-50 in the same way as other matrimonial assets to reflect the vital input of the other partner to the marriage.

Mrs Parlour, 33, accepted that, because her relationship with the premiership star lasted only seven years, she could not claim the full 50 per cent.

The appeal has set a new precedent in divorce law. Previously, maintenance was awarded on the basis of a spouse's "reasonable needs", rather than on the equal share principle that applies to division of matrimonial assets.

The former footballer's wife today issued a statement welcoming today's judgment: "I am very relieved at the outcome of the appeal and the settlement agreed.

"However, it has been a difficult and stressful time for all of us and I have not enjoyed my family and I being in the media's spotlight."

Her legal advisors, Clintons, said the judgment would make similar settlements involving high-income families fairer in future.

In a statement, the law firm said: "This judgement clarifies a hitherto uncertain area of the law and we welcome it.

"It will enable both parties to make provision for the future rather than only the earning party having that option.

"Accordingly it will create a greater degree of fairness.

"However, it must be emphasised that this judgment will apply in only a very limited number of cases, where the family's income is so high that there is a substantial surplus left after both party's reasonable income needs and those of any children have been met."

The case was heard alongside a similar appeal, also successful, by another mother of three for an increase in the £180,000 a year awarded by the same judge against her wealthy accountant ex-husband.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• What makes the perfect mum?
• To keep me stress-free, no more awareness days, please
• What do lottery winners buy?