header-logo header-logo

The after-shock

15 June 2012 / Anna Heenan
Issue: 7518 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Pre-nuptial agreements: where are we now, asks Anna Heenan

We are now almost two years on from the case of Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42, [2011] 1 All ER 373, in which the Supreme Court swept away the old rule that pre-nuptial agreements were contrary to public policy. The result has been an increase in pre-nuptial agreements by those attempting to combat the uncertainties of divorce. Courts have a wide discretion to redistribute property on divorce, which they exercise according to the principles set out in s 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) and the concept of “fairness”. It is, however, widely accepted that the elasticity of “fairness” does little to create certainty. Recent case law on pre-nuptial agreements explores the circumstances in which they will be upheld and provides some guidance to those seeking a more certain outcome.

The Radmacher decision

This decision has been the subject of widespread comment and further analysis is perhaps unhelpful (and somewhat late). It is, however, useful to review the factors that

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll