Radmacher (formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42

Abstract

This paper examines the Supreme Court decision Radmacher v Granatino. It will assess the impact of this case on the position of ante-nuptial agreements in England and Wales. It will also consider the significance of Lady Hale’s dissent, which raises some important social concerns connected to the enforcement of ante-nuptial agreements.

Keywords:

• ante-nuptial agreements
• ancillary relief
• section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
• post-nuptial agreements
• separation agreements

Notes

1. A Duxbury lump sum is calculated so that investment of the sum will produce enough income to meet the needs of the recipient (usually for the rest of his/her life).

2. Separation agreements resolve financial issues after marriage breakdown and will be enforced by the court. The court has power to alter these agreements (as its jurisdiction cannot be ousted). Separation agreements are different to post-nuptial agreements because the latter type of agreement is created before separation and during the marriage.

3. It remains unclear whether or not parties to an ante-nuptial agreement formed 20 years ago in the UK (when ante-nuptial agreements were not enforced) would have been intended to be bound by it. However in future, it will be inferred that parties to an ante-nuptial agreement formed in the UK intended to be bound by it.

4. The Law Commission is an independent statutory body created by the Law Commissions Act 1965 which reviews the law and recommends reform where it is needed.