header-logo header-logo

19 October 2012 / Sarah Caroline Boyle , Kate Molan
Issue: 7534 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family , Ancillary relief
printer mail-detail

North & South

Marital agreements: who’s got it right? Kate Molan & Sarah Caroline Boyle

The Supreme Court’s decision in Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 was welcomed by practitioners in England and Wales for setting down a number of much needed guiding principles about the treatment of marital agreements. Consequently, while an agreement cannot oust the jurisdiction of the court entirely, there is now a rebuttable presumption that a court should give effect to a nuptial agreement which has been entered into freely by both parties with full appreciation of the implications of the agreement unless in the circumstances it would not be fair to hold the parties to their agreement. The court in Radmacher acknowledged the interpretative difficulties facing practitioners in relation to the concept of fairness, making it clear that fairness will vary from case to case. However, it is clear that any agreement which would prejudice the reasonable requirements of the children of the family or fail to address a party’s needs would be regarded as unfair. The circumstances surrounding the creation and execution of the agreement will

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll