Change in UK Pre-Nups Law

Pre-Nups agreements, previously not enforced in England and Wales, have now become enforceable following this ruling.
The former husband of a German heiress has lost his claim to have their pre-nuptual agrrement overturned in the English courts.
Had the Supreme Court ruled in his favour, it would have changed the way English and Welsh courts deal with finances when it comes to divorce.
The agreement between Katrin Radmacher and her former husband, Frenchmen Nicolas Granatino, said they would not claim against each other.
Pre-nups are enforcible in France and Germany, where it was signed, but not in England where the pair married. The ruling changed that.
When they divorced, Mr Granatino changed his mind about the pre-nup and when to court for a settlement.
He was initially awarded £5.8m, reduced in the Court of Appeal to £1m plus maintenance, which took the pre-nup into consideration. This ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• prenuptial
• pre-nup
• divorce
• maintenance
• cash
• settlement
• alimony
• child
• support
• legal

[Verderer]

Switch the genders round in a case like this and the outcome would be very different...if it favours a woman, fine - let her keep her money, so says the crazy pro female legal system. If it had been a man protecting his assets he would have been forced to pay up to his former female partner. How unjust is that? MEN - DO NOT GET MARRIED TO A WOMAN IN THE UK.

[weeleon81]

they should be legal or whats the fuckin point.. if a guys loaded, he should give his ex something (specially if theres kids involved, no doubt he gotta pay.. it should go straight to the kids somehow in my eyes) why should he pay half.. basically funding her so she can look good for the next bloke, look at paul mccartney..his ex got hundreds of millions if im right, and do you think she was back there in the '60s helping write all those songs?No she was only there a couple years now shes minted

[EliteDoomer]

Marriage is an obsolete idea.

[leefost]

Good, marriage is after all just a contract, why not allow for a protection clause within that contract? I think the high profile Mcartney divorce and subsequent public outcry may have influenced this decision.

[Flare400]

This change finally happened because a woman was about to get screwed.

Still, very good news.

[pinegrove33]

Thank God! Why wouldn't they have more clout? Oh, i see, more clout in the case of the WOMAN in need. There it is. If they're fair, meaning if they benefit the woman.

[feministsAreCorrupt]

What is this ruling? Pre-nups are valid only if they favor the woman, rich or poor.

[UcanbeGOD]

Fuck yeah, not that it matters, I'm not getting tied down anyway.

[kwesi45]

This wil certainly make women think twice about initiating divorce settlements with their husbands, or even marrying for money in the first place