header-logo header-logo

01 August 2025 / Sean Hilton , Penny Marshall
Issue: 8127 / Categories: Opinion , Divorce , Family , Tax , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Standish v Standish: Lessons to learn

226806
Strategist, educator, collaborator… the Supreme Court’s decision illustrates the many lives of a high-net-worth adviser, write Sean Hilton & Penny Marshall

The Supreme Court’s decision in Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26 has brought much-needed clarity to how non-matrimonial assets are handled in financial remedy cases. For those advising high-net-worth clients, the judgment offers both reassurance and a timely reminder of how crucial education, behaviour, and proper documentation are in safeguarding assets.

The debate

Mr Standish entered the marriage with significant pre-acquired wealth. In 2017, following estate and tax planning advice, he transferred investments worth £77.8m to his wife, with the intention that they would be settled into trusts. The trusts were never created, and the wife retained legal ownership of the assets. On divorce, she argued that the transfer was a gift and should be treated as matrimonial property. Although the High Court agreed, awarding her £45m, the Court of Appeal disagreed, finding that 75% of the assets retained their non-matrimonial status, and therefore

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll