It is important to understand the legal implications of prenuptial agreements, especially in relation to ancillary relief. One key case to consider is K v K (Ancillary Relief Prenuptial Agreement) 2003 1 FLR 120.
In this case, the court considered the validity of a prenuptial agreement that had been entered into between the parties prior to their marriage. The agreement essentially sought to exclude the jurisdiction of the court to make any order for ancillary relief, thus limiting the financial claims that could be made by either party in the event of a divorce.
The court held that the agreement was valid and enforceable, despite the fact that it sought to exclude the jurisdiction of the court. The court considered a number of factors in coming to this decision, including the fact that both parties had obtained independent legal advice prior to signing the agreement and had entered into it freely and voluntarily.
However, it should be noted that the court did not completely exclude its jurisdiction to make orders for ancillary relief. Rather, it allowed for the possibility for the court to set aside the agreement in certain circumstances, such as where there had been a significant change in circumstances since the agreement was entered into.
This case highlights the importance of seeking independent legal advice when considering entering into a prenuptial agreement. It also serves as a reminder that while such agreements may be valid and enforceable, they do not completely exclude the jurisdiction of the court and should not be relied upon as a complete safeguard against financial claims in the event of a divorce.