Pre-nuptial contracts have been challenged in court, and survived, in the recent case of M v A. In this week’s NLJ, Sarah Jane Lenihan and Laura Couves, of Dawson Cornwell, look at the case in depth.
The judge made some interesting comments on the conduct of parties and on what is required to establish ‘undue pressure’.
Lenihan and Couves write: ‘For practitioners, if you intend to run a conduct argument, it must be pleaded properly; you cannot simply run the argument in the background in the hope that it will add colour to your client’s case.’
The court considered whether pre-nups signed pre-Radmacher, a seminal case in this area, could be considered valid. It also looked at the issue of what is reasonable to meet a divorcing party’s needs.
Lenihan and Couves sum up the key takeaways and messages from the case—read more here.
RELATED ARTICLES
