The latest cases in the UK courts in involving prenuptial agreements show how important it is to have a properly draw-up prenuptial agreement in the UK in order to preserve of your assets in the event of any divorce.

The UK courts are giving growing importance to the provisions of prenuptial agreements and show an increasing willingness to adopt and enforce the provisions of such agreements.

The purpose of this site is to provide a useful overview of the issues involved prenuptial agreements and is not intended to give a detailed review of the UK case-law on prenuptial agreements. 

However, there have been a couple of important decisions in the UK courts very recently and effects of these decision and the implications of the cases are briefly reviewed below.

NG v KR(2008) 

The Katrin Radmacher Case (July 2009)

FACTS: In this case the wife was an extremely wealthy German heiress. The husband was, at the time of the divorce, studying for a university degree at Oxford University although he had previously had a remunerative career in banking. The parties had married in 1998 and separated in 2006 with two children. Prior to the marriage the parties had entered into a prenuptial agreement in Germany, the effect of which was to ensure that, on any future divorce, the personal wealth of the wife would not be in jeopardy. It was not disputed that the parties had entered into a prenuptial agreement and that the basis of the marriage was that each party had understood that in the event of any future divorce the husband would have to do to "stand on his own two feet". The husband challenged the provisions of the prenuptial agreement in the UK courts. The husband had not had any independent legal advice prior to entering into the agreement, there had been no detailed financial disclosure and the agreement made no provision for the birth of any future children nor any financial provision for either of the parties in the event of a divorce. At first hearing it was held that the UK Court was not bound by the agreement as the husband had not had an opportunity to take legal advice and the wife, Katrin Radmacher, successfully appealed.

HELD: In a landmark judgment, on 2nd July 2009, the UK Court of Appeal enforced the prenuptial agreement.

The court upheld the prenuptial agreement based not only on the fact that the marriage was international (and that in the other countries the agreement would be enforced), but also because there had been sufficient opportunity to take legal advice and it was proper to reflect the intentions of the parties.

The traditional position in UK law (namely, that the strict enforcement of pre-nuptial agreements is against public policy) was heavily criticised and the Court of Appeal made it clear that UK prenuptial agreements should be given legal effect and not merely used as a guide to intention of the parties.

This seminal case highlights the fact that a prenuptial agreement, if properly entered into, is now very likely to be adopted and enforced by a UK court. As a result of this case, prenuptial agreements now have even more legal force in the UK than they previously enjoyed.

The Crossley Case(2008)

FACTS: The Crossley case, in 2008, involved a very short marriage of only 14 months duration between two very wealthy individuals.  The husband was worth between £45-60 million and the wife, in her own right, worth about £18 million.  There were no children to the marriage. Both parties had entered into a prenuptial agreement prior to the marriage and each of them had taken independent legal advice.  However, Mrs Crossley sought to argue that the prenuptial agreement was not enforceable because her husband had not made a proper full disclosure of all his assets prior to entering into the agreement. She sought a greater share of his assets than was available under the terms of the prenuptial agreement.  She failed.

HELD: The Court of Appeal held that, in an appropriate case, detailed disclosure of financial assets was not necessary for the prenuptial agreement to be legally enforceable.  Also, the Court effectively sanctioned a short-circuit or 'quickie' procedure in certain cases where both parties to the marriage are wealthy, the duration of the marriage is short and no children are involed involved on the basis that the wife would not have achieved a better financial settlement in the absence of the prenuptial agreement in any event.  Indeed, the Court referred to the 'magnetic importance' of the prenuptial agreement in the circumstances of this particular case.  In February 2008, Mrs. Crosby dropped her claim to her ex-husband’s fortune.

These two cases clearly show that UK courts are now predisposed to following the terms of a prenuptial agreement and if you would like to discuss how this impacts upon your own personal circumstances please call us as soon as possible.