header-logo header-logo

Standish v Standish: Lessons to learn

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

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