However, marriage and post-marriage contracts are currently not technically binding from a legal point of view. In our experience, we have answered a few frequently asked questions about marriage contracts. H, 57, and W, 46, separated after a marriage of about 11 years after having two children together. W had inherited a fortune of about £27 million before the marriage. The parties had entered into a marriage contract after legal advice. The agreement provided that in the event of divorce, neither of them would bring any claims against the other (with the exception of a claim against a child). Each common property would be jointly owned as a tenant based on its respective contributions. H had grossly exaggerated his income and wealth, falsely claiming that he had been financially independent when the agreement was signed, probably by W. H`s approach to reassuring an unpaid tax debt, which amounted to clear financial behavior. It is now about ten years since the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom issued its landmark decision in Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 on the use and validity of marriage contracts. In doing so, it sought to bind the parties to its agreement when it established the principle that “the court should implement a prenuptial agreement entered into voluntarily by each party with full regard to its effects, unless, in the circumstances, it is not fair to bind the parties to their agreement”. Latest development of case law on marriage contracts As is currently the case, it would be unlikely that a court would confirm a marriage contract in the UK if: In a word – no! You cannot be legally forced to sign one. Whether you`re the wealthiest partner under pressure to tie up some of your wealth, or you`re the least affluent partner encouraged to deny your right to financial assistance, you can feel the pressure from your future spouse and even your parents or in-laws who threaten to cancel the marriage if you don`t sign.

But if you don`t agree with everything in the agreement or don`t fully understand it, don`t sign it. Marriage contracts were recognised as enforceable under UK divorce law for the first time in a Supreme Court decision. The most important precedent for marriage contracts in recent times is radmacher v. Granatino of 2010, in which the Supreme Court decided to give “decisive weight” to the agreement. Essentially, this landmark case develops marriage contract law as much as possible without any real legal reform (and new legislation). In addition to the reforms to the UK Marriage Act recommended by the Law Commission, this paves the way for prenups to gain increasing momentum in the event of financial settlements until they can finally come into force. We have extensive experience in drafting prenuptial agreements (and post-marriage contracts) for a range of international clients, including international families, expatriate professionals, celebrities, wealthy entrepreneurs and individuals who all have foreign connections. Our family law team members have a lot of experience in drafting prenuptial agreements and make detailed arrangements on how you want to divide assets such as finances, pensions, businesses and property. For a confidential consultation, email us today at [email protected] or call us now on 0114 358 9009. Interestingly, we are now seeing more and more marriage contracts put to the test, with more and more being drafted and signed according to the Radmacher decision. So, what are the application criteria? Unlike their business counterparts, prenuptial agreements are not automatically enforceable, but there are nevertheless a number of requirements and formalities that must be completed for the marriage contract to be maintained, as follows: In a statement, Radmacher added: “For Nicolas and I in our home countries – France and Germany – these agreements are completely normal and routine. We promised each other that if something went wrong between us, we would both leave without making financial claims against each other.

The promise made to me has not been kept. The most important case in the development of law in this area was Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42. In this case, a French husband and a German wife signed a marriage contract before getting married in London, and they were living in England when they separated. According to the agreement, there would be no financial provision for either party in the event of divorce. As a result, the wife appealed when the lower court awarded the husband £5.8 million and won her case before the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. WW v HW [2015] EWHC 1844 (Fam), the High Court attaches considerable importance to a marriage contract, although it did not take into account the husband`s needs. The court took into account the husband`s financial conduct. Jane Keir is a family lawyer and partner on the Family and Divorce team.

She advises on asset protection, before and after divorce, and her extensive experience in negotiating discreet settlements and negotiating cases means she is in demand with individual clients and family offices. (1) The existence of a preliminary marriage contract does not replace the jurisdiction of the court under article 25. Each case is decided on the basis of its own facts and an agreement that is given appropriate weight in the circumstances. The agreement has been considerably attached. H knew that the agreement was a condition for W to marry her and that individual autonomy was important. A needs-based allocation to H would not affect the quality of life of W or the children, but would come from the non-marital property protected by the agreement and would therefore not be generously valued. When assessing H`s income needs, H should not be overly protected, as the risks to his future safety arose from the uncertainties caused by his conduct. “If there is a paradigmatic case in which the court will consider the marriage contract not only as one of the peripheral factors of the case, but as a factor of magnetic importance, it seems to me that it is exactly such a case.” Many couples also opt for a post-marriage contract if they move to the UK and at least one of the couples wants to protect their property in the event of a future English divorce. We regularly advise our clients on marriage contracts, whether they are autonomous or under a marriage contract or a foreign marriage contract.

But times are changing. For some time now, matrimonial contracts have been concluded more and more frequently on our island with Sceptre Island, and as a result the family courts have to deal with the problems they pose to our traditional approach to financial remedies. In the latest case of BN v. MA [2013], EWHC J. 4250 (Fam) Mostyn stated that there was nothing inherently unfair in an agreement to close non-marital property, including property that was owned before marriage (prenuptial assets) and property that a party expects from a third party during marriage, by gift or inheritance for life. The court should promulgate a marriage contract that is entered into voluntarily by each party with full regard to its effects, unless, in the circumstances, it is not fair to bind the parties to their agreement. (3) No marriage contract shall be maintained insofar as it affects the needs of the children concerned. By an eight-to-one majority, the Supreme Court justices dismissed Granatino`s appeal, saying that after their decision, “it will be natural to conclude that parties who enter into agreements will intend to be granted this effect.” The Law Commission`s bill is therefore the likely way in which marriage contracts will be made legally binding in the future, provided that each agreement meets certain requirements. We summarize these requirements here. The requirements, in addition to financial disclosure and legal advice, include that an agreement is not intended to enter into a contract to meet the needs of one of the parties (and subsequent children). Any prenup agreement to leave one of the parties without the means to satisfy his “financial needs” will therefore be “disqualified” from the alimony and therefore referred to the usual legal proceedings.

“This decision could introduce an inherent level of gender discrimination within the family justice system, as marriage contracts mainly benefit the rich and it is more often the woman in the marriage who is the weakest party financially. There is currently, and not surprisingly, little political impetus to give marriage contracts greater prominence in our law. It therefore remains of the view that the person who takes the most effective measure as soon as possible may well obtain the greatest advantage if he or she asks the Court to determine the effect of the marriage contract as an early issue. You may also be interested in our other blogs on prenuptial agreements and asset protection in the event of divorce – see HERE. The court suggested that for a marriage contract to have “full weight, the husband and wife must enter into it of their own free will, without undue influence or pressure, and inform it of its effects” (paragraph 62). So it`s not all or nothing when it comes to the issue of these agreements. .