Family Law - impact of Standish v Standish - keeping your non-matrimonial assets
The recent Court of Appeal case of Standish v Standish 2024 gives guidance as to whether pre-marital assets are considered to be “matrimonial” or “non-matrimonial” assets within divorce, and further guidance for “the sharing principle” often argued in financial remedy cases.
What are matrimonial and non-matrimonial assets?
Matrimonial assets are those acquired during the marriage by both parties. These types of assets usually include, but not limited to, the family home, pensions and savings. Within financial remedy proceedings, “the sharing principle” will apply when distributing matrimonial assets.
Assets that were acquitted before the marriage, or those acquired after the parties have separated, are often argued to be non-matrimonial assets. These types of assets are not always shared between the parties within financial remedy proceedings, unless circumstances arise that may then make them matrimonial assets, for example they have become merged with matrimonial money, or if there are insufficient matrimonial assets to meet the needs of the other party.
What were the facts of the case of Standish v Standish?
The husband was a successful businessman before the parties were married, which included a sheep and cattle farm in another country amongst his financial portfolio. They started a relationship in 2003, were married in 2005 and they had two children from the marriage. The husband retired in 2007, and they moved to England to live in 2010 to their new family home.
In 2017 the husband received tax planning advice and transferred £77 million of assets to the Wife, before he became domiciled in England. It was intended that those assets would be placed into a discretionary trust for the children, but this did not happen. The Wife issued for divorce in 2020.
When the matter was before the Court in 2022, the Court decided that the family home was matrimonial property but rejected the wife’s argument that that the portfolio of assets transferred to her in 2017 were her separate property, and instead ruled that the portfolio was matrimonial property. With total assets circa £132 million the Judge ruled that matrimonial assets were £122 million which included the £77 portfolio given to the wife in 2017. The Judge decided to split the assets with 34% to wife and 66% to husband, and that a needs assessment was not required due the sums that were awarded.
The Appeal
The Wife’s appeal was dismissed – her claim that the £77 million was her non-matrimonial money and that the sheep and cattle farm was a matrimonial asset which should have been shared equally.
The husband’s cross appeal was allowed – he claimed that the Judge was wrong to view the 2017 assets and the farm as matrimonial assets, and that, if the 2017 portfolio was determined matrimonial property, then the share given to the wife was excessive.
Outcome – The Court determined that matrimonial assets totalled £50.48 million of which the sharing principle should apply, giving the Wife £25 million and the husband the balance of assets being £107 million.
How this affects us
This ruling demonstrates that even when assets are brought to a marriage, it cannot automatically be assumed that they will be subject to the sharing principle. Which means, your own assets from outside the marriage MIGHT NOT have to be shared with your spouse upon divorce.
Each case is treated differently and is dependent on personal circumstances. However, you can ring fence your pre-marital assets, and consider a post-nuptial agreement.
