Laura Hughes & Rebecca Dziobon provide an overview on the scope & nature of non-matrimonial property
- If parties can prove that they have made an unmatched contribution they may be able to ringfence ‘non-matrimonial’ capital to be divided either in part or excluded entirely.
Practitioners are all too aware that there is no accepted definition of ‘non-matrimonial property’. This can become the focal point of negotiations where an equal division of capital is challenged. The debate starts once ‘needs’ have been met and there is surplus capital available to share. Reported decisions tend to relate to the more extreme ‘big money’ cases. However, the principles filter down to everyday cases and this article considers the different types of arguments for seeking a departure from equality.
Under s 25(2)(f) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 the court must consider the ‘contributions’ of the parties when assessing the fair division of assets. The starting (and usually end) point is that equal contributions to a long marital partnership should mean that the ‘fruits’
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
