header-logo header-logo

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

The after-shock

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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll