header-logo header-logo

01 August 2025 / Sean Hilton , Penny Marshall
Issue: 8127 / Categories: Opinion , Divorce , Family , Tax , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Standish v Standish: Lessons to learn

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll