header-logo header-logo

Fairy tale ending for pre-nups?

13 January 2011
Issue: 7448 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Law Commission consultation proposes divorce reform

The Law Commission launched a consultation this week, Marital Property Agreements, into the controversial area of pre-nups and post-nups, suggesting a range of possible reforms such as allowing couples to ring-fence “special property” to protect it in the event of relationship breakdown.

This could be used to “protect the integrity of a family farm or business that might not survive if it was partitioned on divorce”.

The Commissioners identify the formalities that would need to be met before a pre-nup or post-nup could be upheld, including the need for independent legal advice. They ask whether full financial disclosure should be required, or whether that would be “intrusive, unnecessary or unnecessarily expensive”.

Eve-of-wedding agreements should be allowed, they say, even though the courts have shown reluctance to enforce these.

They acknowledge that pre-nups would “remain inappropriate” for couples with limited resources.

Geraldine Morris, family solicitor at LexisNexis, says: “The paper follows the Supreme Court’s decision in Radmacher v Granatino in October 2010 when a pre-nuptial agreement entered into by the

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