The tangled legacy of a millionaire accountant has sparked a bitter High Court confrontation between two women who discovered they were both married to the same man.
A Shocking Discovery After Death
Following the death of James Dinsdale from cancer in October 2020, his partner, beautician Margaret Dinsdale, 41, was devastated to learn a life-altering secret. As she began handling his affairs, she discovered he was still legally married to cosmetic dentist Dr Victoria Fowell, 53, making their own 2017 Las Vegas wedding "void".
This revelation stripped Margaret of any automatic right to inherit from Dinsdale's £1.8 million fortune, built from his thriving central London property development business. Under intestacy rules, because he died without a will, his entire estate was set to pass to his first wife, Dr Fowell, and his 28-year-old son, William Dinsdale.
Dueling Vegas Weddings and a Life Built on Lies
The court heard how James Dinsdale, also a World War Two history expert, first married Dr Fowell in 2012 at the Little White Wedding Chapel on Las Vegas Boulevard. The pair never divorced.
Five years later, in 2017, and just 600 metres away at the Chapel of the Flowers, he married Margaret Dinsdale. Margaret had met James in 2008, with their friendship turning romantic in 2014. They set up home together a year later, and she had no idea his previous marriage was still legally binding.
Margaret became his primary carer after he was diagnosed with terminal cancer, looking after him "24 hours per day" after giving up her work. She is now living on universal credit while raising a small child.
A Fierce Legal Fight Over a Diminishing Fortune
In July, a judge formally recognised Margaret Dinsdale's rights as a "spouse", allowing her to bring a substantial claim under the 1975 Inheritance Act. However, the case took a dramatic turn last week when her legal team returned to London's High Court.
Her barrister, Gideon Roseman, told Mr Justice Mann that Dr Fowell had "plundered" the estate, treating it as her own. He alleged she had paid herself around £400,000 from the estate's funds and sold two properties—a pub and a cottage—for a combined £600,000, a figure he claimed was far below their potential £1.5 million value.
Mr Roseman argued that Dr Fowell was trying to "frustrate the claimant's claim" by quickly liquidating assets, leaving only about £17,000 of the original fortune traceable in her solicitor's account. He sought a freezing order to prevent further "dissipation" of the estate's assets.
Dr Fowell's lawyers firmly denied these claims, stating she had not attempted to hide assets. They highlighted her responsibilities, including caring for a young child and her elderly parents, for whom some estate funds were used to adapt her home.
The Judge's Ruling: A Compromise in the Estate Battle
After half a day in court, Mr Justice Mann refused to grant a full asset freeze, concerned about the "dire and disproportionate impact" it could have on Dr Fowell's dental practice.
Instead, he imposed a more limited injunction, freezing the remaining estate assets and Dr Fowell's main personal assets, including her home and dental practice. Crucially, he also ordered Dr Fowell to draw up accounts detailing exactly what happened to the realised assets of James Dinsdale's estate.
This legal battle, pitting two unknowing wives against each other, ensures the complex and painful fallout from James Dinsdale's double life is far from over.
