In the recent case of Standish v Standish, the court ordered a huge reduction in the wife’s award of £45 million to £25 million on the basis of the husbands contribution to the marriage with assets he owned before the parties relationship.
Does this mean that in every case the court will simply divide matrimonial assets equally between husband and wife, and exclude everything owned before the marriage or acquired from third parties for example family inheritance?
The short answer to that is no.
The Standish case is a classic example of huge assets making the question of needs of the parties more or less irrelevant.
£25 million would fulfil the needs of any of our clients, but where there are significant needs, but the matrimonial assets earned by either or both parties during the course of the relationship are clearly insufficient to deal with basic requirements for accommodation and pension provision, then it is much more likely the non-matrimonial assets will be taken into account.
For example , if Fred comes into the marriage owning a property, and Sheila moves in without making a contribution, it may be necessary to take the value of the house into account to deal with Shiela‘s reasonable needs(and those of any children) And ensure that they have a home.
If the marriage goes on for many years, and Fred and Sheila clearly need pension provision, then it is also likely that Fred’s Pension will be divided in a pension sharing order to provide for Sheila’s future reasonable needs, even if his pension was all saved before the relationship started.
We deal with these sort of cases all the time, usually by agreement at the end of the day. Contact us for a free telephone call to assess how we can help you.
