header-logo header-logo

28 April 2011 / Catherine Costley
Issue: 7463 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Swing of the pendulum

How can a divorcing couple’s reasonable needs be informed
by pre-marital property? Catherine Costley investigates

The decision of Mostyn J in the recent case of N v F [2011] EWHC 586 Fam, provides helpful guidance to practitioners considering the way in which the existence of pre-marital assets should be reflected in the division of matrimonial assets. Mostyn J follows the procedure described by Wilson LJ in Jones v Jones [2011] EWCA Civ 41, [2011] All ER (D) 231 (Jan) but, when cross-checking the outcome of that analysis against the parties’ needs, acknowledges that pre-marital assets, which may well be ring-fenced in the ultimate division, can inform the reasonable needs of the parties.

Background

The parties had been married for 16 years and had two children. At the date of the marriage in 1993 the husband had assets worth £2.116m. By the time of the breakdown of the marriage the assets of the parties were valued at £9.714m.  The husband proposed that the wife should receive 43% of the assets leaving him with 57%.

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll