header-logo header-logo

Radmacher offers hope on pre-nups

09 July 2009
Issue: 7377 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

German heiress divorce may have “decisive” impact on UK family law

Pre-nuptial agreements could enter the “mainstream” of UK family law following the Court of Appeal’s finding in Radmacher, say family lawyers.
In Radmacher v Granatino [2009] EWCA Civ 649, the court ruled that a pre-nup could be “decisive” in the divorce of wealthy German heiress, Katrin Radmacher, who is said to be worth £100m, and her French husband, Nicolas Gramatino.

The husband’s initial divorce award of £5.4m was reduced to a one-off lump sum of £1m plus a loan for the cost of a home, which must be repaid when the youngest child reaches 22.

Sarah Anticoni, a partner in the family team at Charles Russell, says: “Until now pre-marital agreements have not been legally binding in England. However, the future of these agreements is not set in stone and, in the short term at least, their impact will lie with other judges who are asked to decide similar cases. 

“This decision should be the catalyst for Parliament and the Law Commission to take up the baton. The profession have been clamouring for reform for years but no statutory change has been forthcoming as it is not seen as a vote winner. 

“This decision is particularly important for non-English couples who have entered into pre-marital agreements overseas before they marry. It demonstrates that the English court is going to be far less willing to interfere with such agreements in the future.”

Zoe Bagg, senior associate, McGuireWoods, says: “Many of our clients come from civil law jurisdictions where pre-nuptials (or other protection of assets under the civil code) are commonplace.

“This is a progressive move towards the harmonisation of laws in Europe in this area and will hopefully give encouragement to those working towards the harmonisation of European succession laws.”

Christina Blacklaws, senior partner of London family law firm Blacklaws Davis, says: “We are still a little way off knowing whether the ruling will be upheld. Mr Granatino is said to be considering appealing to the House of Lords. However, this is a very significant movement in favour of pre-nuptial agreements and one which will be welcomed by many middle-income families, for whom it has enormous potential significance.”

 

Issue: 7377 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll