A landmark legal judgement means that divorce settlements decided by post-nup
Pre-nuptials could soon be a thing of the past as a landmark millionaire divorce case has ruled that post-nuptial agreements can be legally binding.
So what exactly does this mean? Well, legal experts are saying that decisions made during a marriage on how to split wealth are legally binding (post-nuptials) rather than agreements made before the wedding day (pre-nuptials).
The issue was brought up during the divorce proceedings of Roderick MacLeod, who has a fortune of £14m, and his wife, Marcia.
The couple made a pre-nup ahead of their big day in 1994 but had subsequently amended the deal through a series of post-nuptials during their tumultuous marriage.
If the court had stuck to the pre-nup Mrs MacLeod would have received £1.89m, but instead they chose to follow a later post-nuptial agreement made in 2002, which entitled her to £2.2m.
‘During their marriage, couples are now able to agree what they think is fair if they should split up rather than have the courts impose its version of fairness upon them,’ says Sandra Davis, the head of family law at Mishcon de Reya, the leading firm of solicitors that represented Diana, Princess of Wales and Heather Mills in their divorces.
‘An agreement made during a marriage will now have the force of law, allowing married couples to regulate their financial affairs for the first time.’
‘Hopefully this will put an end to long, acrimonious and costly litigation. Agreements reached at the best of times will now be binding at the worst of times.’
We wonder if Madonna and Guy Ritchie knew about this before their divorce!