A High Court judge in London raised an eyebrow after a foreign politician who made a written agreement to pay his estranged wife £60,000 a month said he had not been wearing his reading glasses and had not known what he was signing.

Mr Justice Mostyn heard that an agreement had been signed when the pair met in a Chinese restaurant.

The judge who said there was evidence of "serious wealth", said the former government minister was not naive and said he found the explanation hard to accept.

Detail of the case has emerged in a written ruling by the judge following a hearing in the Family Division in the High Court in London.

The politician has four wives and is embroiled in a divorce cash fight after his marriage to wife number four broke down.

Mr Justice Mostyn had been asked to make decisions about how much maintenance the man should pay pending final rulings on the dispute.

The judge said the politician was in his 60s and had four wives because polygamy was permitted in his home country.

He has not named anyone involved but has said the woman is an Egyptian who has moved to the UK with the couple's two children - and he has indicated that the man is a "rich Arab".

"The husband and the wife met in a Chinese restaurant," said Mr Justice Mostyn, in his ruling.

"The wife brought certain documents with her that she wished the husband to sign. One of the documents that he did sign was a confirmation by him to start paying her immediately £60,000 per month.

"In his witness statement the husband says that he was emotionally disturbed at the time. He was missing his children whom the wife was not allowing him to see.

"He did not have his reading glasses. He did not know what he was signing or, if he did, his mind was altered by the circumstances so that he did not fully appreciate what he was putting his signature to."

The judge said the politician was "no ingenue" and added: "He is a former minister in the government of his home country.

"I find it very hard to accept that he would have signed a document committing himself to pay £60,000 per month without appreciating the consequences of his signature."

He said he would make "robust assumptions" about the man's ability to pay.

But he also said the woman's initial "budget" had been "absurd".

Mr Justice Mostyn concluded that monthly payments of about £33,000 a month for the woman and the children were "reasonable".