header-logo header-logo

The worst of both worlds?

11 February 2010 / Lisa Carkeek
Issue: 7404 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Has Radmacher clarified the status of pre-nuptial agreements? Lisa Carkeek reports

In England and Wales pre-nuptial agreements (PNAs) are void on public policy grounds and cannot be enforced. However, they remain subject to the judicial discretion conferred on judges to achieve fairness between parties in ancillary relief proceedings (Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, s 25). This situation has been criticised as “the worst of both worlds” (Hoffmann LJ in Pounds v Pounds [1994] 4 All ER 777).

The 1998 government green paper Supporting Families suggested that PNAs should not be legally binding where:
l one or both parties have not obtained independent specialist legal advice;
l no provision is made for children;
l the PNA does not comply with general contract law;
l the PNA is unjust to one or both parties;
l one or both parties failed to provide prior full financial disclosure; or
l the PNA is made less than 21 days before the marriage.

Further, the deputy High Court judge in K v K (Ancillary Relief: Pre-Nuptial Agreement) [2003] 1 FLR 120 distilled from the authorities on PNAs a checklist

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll