header-logo header-logo

Standish v Standish: Lessons to learn

01 August 2025 / Sean Hilton , Penny Marshall
Issue: 8127 / Categories: Opinion , Divorce , Family , Tax , Legal services
printer mail-detail
226806
Strategist, educator, collaborator… the Supreme Court’s decision illustrates the many lives of a high-net-worth adviser, write Sean Hilton & Penny Marshall

The Supreme Court’s decision in Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26 has brought much-needed clarity to how non-matrimonial assets are handled in financial remedy cases. For those advising high-net-worth clients, the judgment offers both reassurance and a timely reminder of how crucial education, behaviour, and proper documentation are in safeguarding assets.

The debate

Mr Standish entered the marriage with significant pre-acquired wealth. In 2017, following estate and tax planning advice, he transferred investments worth £77.8m to his wife, with the intention that they would be settled into trusts. The trusts were never created, and the wife retained legal ownership of the assets. On divorce, she argued that the transfer was a gift and should be treated as matrimonial property. Although the High Court agreed, awarding her £45m, the Court of Appeal disagreed, finding that 75% of the assets retained their non-matrimonial status, and therefore reduced the wife’s award to £25m. This is said

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

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

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