The Court of Appeal has rejected a woman's attempt to obtain more money from her former husband after a four-fold rise in the value of his shares in a company.

Kim Walkden, aged 47, had sought a higher maintenance payment from her former husband, Martin, as a result of the profit he made from the sale of the business, of which he was a major shareholder.

The case throws into reverse a number of credit crunch-related cases where former husbands have tried to have their payments cut because of economic difficulties.

In an earlier settlement, Mrs Walkden had received a £225,000 lump sum, based on an £800,000 valuation of her ex-husband's company in 2006 when the couple were divorced.

In August 2007 the timber company, Triesse, was sold for more than £3.7 million.

At York County Court last June, Mrs Walkden was given permission to reopen the divorce case after her lawyers submitted that the company sale meant her husband received 82 per cent of the couple's assets while she received 18 per cent.

However, Mr Walkden, aged 47, won his appeal because the Court of Appeal ruled that his situation was no different from that of the tycoon Brian Myerson whose divorce settlement was not altered despite the collapse of his assets following the fiancial crisis.

Lord Justice Thorpe, sitting with Lord Justice Wall and Lord Justice Elias at the Court of Appeal, said that Mr and Mrs Walkden had reached a compromise agreement out of court. He said he had handed down his judgment because the issues in the case were of "general importance".

Gail Cartwright at Rowlands, commented: "Lord Justice Thorpe was entiely correct when he said that both parties would have been aware of the variable value of the shareholding when the original settlement was agreed in January 2007. The case underscores the transient and unpredictable nature of business valuations as part of divorce settlements, especially in the current climate of economic uncertainty and financial volatility."