header-logo header-logo

The after-shock

15 June 2012 / Anna Heenan
Issue: 7518 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Pre-nuptial agreements: where are we now, asks Anna Heenan

We are now almost two years on from the case of Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42, [2011] 1 All ER 373, in which the Supreme Court swept away the old rule that pre-nuptial agreements were contrary to public policy. The result has been an increase in pre-nuptial agreements by those attempting to combat the uncertainties of divorce. Courts have a wide discretion to redistribute property on divorce, which they exercise according to the principles set out in s 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) and the concept of “fairness”. It is, however, widely accepted that the elasticity of “fairness” does little to create certainty. Recent case law on pre-nuptial agreements explores the circumstances in which they will be upheld and provides some guidance to those seeking a more certain outcome.

The Radmacher decision

This decision has been the subject of widespread comment and further analysis is perhaps unhelpful (and somewhat late). It is, however, useful to review the factors that

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll