header-logo header-logo

07 August 2015 / Margaret Hatwood
Issue: 7664 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Paper, scissors, stone

nlj_7664_hatwwod

Marry in haste (sign a post-nup) & repent at leisure, says Margaret Hatwood

The recent case of Hopkins v Hopkins [2015] EWHC 812 (Fam), [2015] All ER (D) 85 (Apr) underlines the importance of not signing a pre- or post-nuptial agreement unless you are sure that you wish to be bound by its terms.

Pre-nuptial or post-nuptial agreements (NAs) in England and Wales are not automatically binding, however, there has been movement over recent years for the courts in determining financial issues between divorcing couples to hold the couple bound by NAs subject to certain safeguards. Chief of which are a full and frank financial disclosure at the time the agreement is signed, independent good quality legal advice, lack of duress or improper pressure. Indeed since the case of Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42, [2011] 1 All ER 373 nuptial agreements have been upheld if it would not be unfair to do so.

Radmacher: a summary of the findings

The Supreme Court in Radmacher said: “If a…nuptial agreement…is to carry full weight both

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

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Restructuring and insolvency practice strengthened by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

North West residential development team welcomes partner and associate

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
A landmark ruling has delivered the first judicial application of the UK’s anti-SLAPP regime and provided fresh guidance on abusive litigation
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
Non-court dispute resolution is no longer an alternative in family law—it is rapidly becoming the norm
back-to-top-scroll