It’s too bad their names were kept secret, because an English couple in Gloucestershire has had a doozey of a divorce. The husband, an investment banker who worked in the City, was worth a bundle. They were married 11 years. There were no children, although she miscarried in 2001. But there were three horses, including a foal her husband gave her in 2004.

The husband and wife separated in 2005, with $4.5 million in marital assets. In 2006, a judge decided that the wife should get $148,000 a year in maintenance, including $93,000 a year for the upkeep of her three horses, and a one-time payment of $1.7 million so she could buy a home with enough grazing land for her horses.

Turns out, the wife was passionate about the sport of Eventing, which is a kind of triathlon for horse and rider.

The sympathetic judge noted that before the marriage the wife had worked part time in the City, London’s financial center, but she had given that up to become an interior decorator and part-time book-keeper. “In any event,” he said, “the wife does not want a 9-to-5 job, because this would not give her enough time with her horses.”

It was another recent trial in which pets became a major battleground in a divorce.

As long as her husband was earning his $110,000 a year, plus substantial bonuses, the judge ruled, “it was not right to expect the wife to work full-time so she was left with no time for her horses or her Eventing.” The decision, especially supporting the horses, did not make the husband happy, and he appealed to a three-judge panel. He argued that keeping three horses was an unnecessary luxury (we’d love to hear his list of necessary luxuries), and that she didn’t need to buy a home with enough land to graze the horses. She could, he said, board her Eventing horses at a nearby stable.

Eventing is the sort of thing in Britain that will have Princess Anne handing you a giant trophy if you win, and you being hauled away in an ambulance if you fall. The sport involves dressage, formal riding in a show ring while wearing tailcoat and top hat; riding cross country over a tough course of fences, walls, ditches and standing water; and show jumping in a ring.

Not only must a horse be a superior athlete, but the rider must be too. Eventers combine firm thighs, a steady hand, a brave heart, and a steel will. Good qualities in a wife, and formidable in an opponent in divorce court. Especially because Eventing, which is an Olympic sport, is one of the few sports where women compete equally with men. “Horses are my family,” she told the appeals court. “I see them every day. You form a very close bond with horses.”

The three appeals court judges gave the wife the blue ribbon: they confirmed the annual maintenance for the upkeep of her horses, and the money for a home with grazing room for the horses. Sir Mark Potter, the senior appeals court judge, said: “During the marriage the horses played a major part in the wife’s life with the consent and encouragement of the husband.”

Note that the court carefully considered the actual existence of the horses. Heather Mills was denied $50,000 a year for equestrian activities in her divorce action, but that was because she didn’t have horses, and didn’t ride.

A lesson to divorcing wives: You might as well ask for support for your greatest passions, even if in involves raising guard dogs, or flying a biplane.

You never know what a judge will decide is your fair share.