Pre-nuptial agreements: Agreeing to disagree

Vikkie Chetcuti examines case law developments on pre-nuptial agreements, in particular as to legal advice, jurisdiction clauses, needs and sharing, in the post-Radmacher era ‘In Brack the Court of Appeal grappled with the issue of whether the mere existence of a valid pre-nuptial agreement meant the court was constrained as a matter of course from …
This post is only available to members.

In practice: Conflicting views

Chrissie Cuming Walters highlights the dichotomy of modern family law on financial provision: autonomy versus paternalism ‘The fairness of provision in any nuptial agreement entered into is likely to erode over time and potentially be subsumed by changing circumstances through the passage of time, allowing for an increased use of paternalism.’ Many practitioners would agree …
This post is only available to members.

Pre-nups and private client: Take note

Mark Pawlowski considers a recent decision on the enforceability of pre-nuptial agreements ‘It was essential that both parties should have entered into the agreement of their own free will without undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation, and with a full appreciation of its implications.’ The recent Court of Appeal decision in Versteegh v Versteegh [2018] has …
This post is only available to members.

KA v MA
 Neutral citation: [2018] EWHC 499 (Fam)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Spring 2018 #171

When the parties met in July 2000, they had both been previously married. In the husband’s case, a difficult divorce caused him to set his face against remarriage. He had three sons who spent significant periods of time with their father in a substantial property near Reading (Property G) which had a value of £3.35m. He (together with his brother) had a successful business in international travel and tourism, owning 51% of the shares in the company valued at £30m. The wife, who had no children, had two rented properties with a combined equity of £245,615. By the time she moved into Prope...

Privacy: Behind closed doors

Shlomit Glaser and Tim Jones examine issues of privacy and confidentiality in family proceedings ‘There remains a judicial discretion to determine whether the media can be in attendance and the extent to which what they witness may be reported.’Confidentiality can be a significant issue in family proceedings for many divorcing couples. This is particularly so …
This post is only available to members.

International Focus: Well-prepared

Suzanne Kingston reviews recent developments in the courts’ approach to marital agreements ‘Where a pre-nuptial agreement has a clear purpose, and that purpose is understood by both parties (who have received advice and have an understanding what they are agreeing to give up), it is more likely to be upheld.’ If 2016 taught us anything …
This post is only available to members.

Financial Provision: An open door

Vanessa McMurtrie examines the lessons to be learnt from the outcome in the long-running case of Wyatt v Vince ‘Good practice means we should always be looking for, and encouraging our clients to consider, the possibility of compromise.’If ever there was a good example of why divorcees of modest means should agree a clean-break dismissal …
This post is only available to members.

Media Access: Private affairs

Charlotte Conner summarises the diverging approaches of the judiciary to media access and privacy and the implications for the parties ‘Where parties are compelled to provide details of their economic circumstances, most would be alarmed to think that it could all be made public.’Restrictions on the reporting of financial remedy proceedings by the press have …
This post is only available to members.

Pre-Nuptial Agreements: Turning of the tide

Suzanne Todd and Luca Del Panta examine the future of pre-nups in the light of the Law Commission’s report ‘“Needs” in the context of a pre-nuptial agreement can be significantly less than they would otherwise be. But where the guillotine falls in any given case is intensely fact-specific.’ When, in October 2010, the Supreme Court …
This post is only available to members.