Businessman was forced to live in a pigsty after he accused his partner of affair, court hears

Telegraph Reporters
James Glessing split with partner Jane Lazell in 2015 and lived in the converted outbuilding even though she took a lie detector test to prove she was innocent - Champion News

A businessman was forced to live in a pigsty after he accused his ex partner of having an affair, a court has heard.

James Glessing split with partner Jane Lazell in 2015 and lived in the converted outbuilding even though she took a lie detector test to prove she was innocent.

The pigsty was in the grounds of the £1m home in Upminster, Essex, and he told Central London County Court that his ex partner of 37 years excluded him from the house.

The couple, who have two children, ended up in court after he launched a claim to claim money from her for the time he spent living out of the home.

But a judge turned down his claim as Ms Lazell flatly denied forcing him from the family house, insisting that he still holds a key and chose to move into the sty of his own accord.

The court was told they had lived at the three-acre property together for 15 years, selling free range eggs from their land, raising pigs and running an e-cigarette business.

But Ms Lazell told the court they split after Mr Glessing suggested she had slept with another man around 30 years ago.

She passed the lie detector test and showed the results to Mr Glessing, she explained, but he was still unconvinced, the court heard. "He just said they're not always correct," added Ms Lazell.

Picture shows some of the outbuildings on the £1m property in Essex Credit: Champion News

After the breakup she tried to sell the property with the proceeds evenly split, but Mr Glessing objected because he was "deeply emotionally attached" to the property.

"It's got trees around it and you can't see it from the lane. Some of the oak trees there are 750 years old," he told Judge Richard Roberts. "I don't even like calling it a yard, it's a lovely place."

He brought a claim for occupational rent against his ex in relation to the time he says he was "excluded" from the family home by her, and asked the judge to give him the right to live off the farmyard and sell the rest of the property.

Judge Richard Roberts rejected Mr Glessing's claim for rent from his ex as compensation for his being excluded from the house, saying there was no evidence he had been turfed out.

"It doesn't seem fair or equitable to charge her occupational rent," he said.

He also ruled against Mr Glessing on his bid to keep the farmyard.

The judge ordered that the entire site and house should be sold within six months and the profits split equally between the former couple.