An Italian financier has lost his bid to block his Australian wife from filing divorce papers in England on the basis it was no longer her domicile of choice
Ferrara v Ferrara [2026] EWCA Civ 512 concerned the divorce and financial remedy proceedings of Australian citizen Caroline Ferrara and her Italian financier husband, Ferruccio Ferrara. They lived in London between 2004, when they met, and 2019, when they moved to Milan with their two children.
The wife, who did not speak Italian, had unwittingly entered into a ‘separazione dei beni’ matrimonial regime upon signing the marriage register at their wedding in Italy in 2008. The regime, also known as a separation of assets, means each spouse retains exclusive ownership of any property and assets they have acquired before and during the marriage in their sole names, under Italian law. Therefore, should the couple get divorced in Italy, the wife, who left modelling to focus on raising the couple’s children, would not be entitled to a share in her husband’s capital assets.
Caroline Ferrara sought to bring the divorce in England. Her husband appealed, arguing Italy was the appropriate forum and that the judge had applied the wrong test to determine whether she had lost her domicile of choice. Lords Justice Moylan, Arnold and Miles dismissed the appeal.
Melissa Lesson, partner at Mills & Reeve (pictured), which acted for Caroline Ferrara, said the court concluded she had retained a domicile of choice in England, and that ‘England was also the most appropriate forum for divorce proceedings, especially as a divorce in Italy would likely leave Mrs Ferrara destitute’.
Lesson said the Court of Appeal’s judgment ‘offers invaluable clarity into this area of law.
‘It highlights the potentially disastrous financial prejudice to the financially weaker party that can arise when moving to another jurisdiction and the willingness of the English courts to step in where appropriate... it may also assist other couples who have called England home. It confirms that notwithstanding not living in England for a considerable period of time, parties may retain a domicile in England, allowing them to seize jurisdiction in divorce proceedings.’
