Emily Prince, an Associate Solicitor in our Family Law department, explains the significance of the Supreme Court’s impending decision in the case of Standish v Standish.
The Supreme Court decision in Standish v Standish will be one of the most significant developments in family law in recent years for all couples divorcing, but especially for individuals with substantial pre-marital or inherited wealth.
Standish v Standish
This case centred on whether £77 million, originally owned by Clive Standish before marriage and later transferred to his wife Anna during their relationship as part of a tax planning exercise, should be treated as matrimonial property to be shared upon divorce, or whether it should be ring-fenced as part of broader estate and wealth planning.
In 2024, Anna Standish was awarded £45 million in the High Court based on all assets being treated as shared. However, the Court of Appeal drastically cut that award to £25 million, the largest reduction ever seen
in a UK divorce case. This decision was made on the basis that the assets’ source and intended use should have been given weight. The case returned to Court on 30 April – 1 May and the Supreme Court’s judgment is currently awaited. This will offer crucial guidance as to what happens in similar cases, which often arise, albeit maybe without such high figures.
Why does the decision in Standish v Standish matter?
In English family law, the House of Lords set in 2006 the “sharing principle” in Miller/McFarlane. The default position for the last 20 years or so has therefore been that all assets built up during a long marriage are shared, unless there is a good reason to depart from that. However, pre-marital assets, gifts, or inheritance can sometimes be excluded, particularly if they haven’t been mingled with joint finances or used as family property.
What Standish v Standish addresses is a grey area: what happens when pre-marital wealth is transferred between spouses during the marriage, either as gifts or for estate planning reasons? Is that then “shared” wealth or still personal? The answer, until now, has been far from clear, which leaves solicitors and clients having to argue for their case.
This ruling will provide long-awaited guidance and could significantly impact how people structure their finances, protect inherited wealth, and approach pre- and post-nuptial agreements. It also brings into sharper focus the importance of documenting the intention behind wealth transfers in marriage, which people often do not consider in the moment.
As family solicitors, this will be a landmark decision that will shift the legal landscape, not just for the ultra-wealthy, but for any couple navigating financial fairness during separation. Guidance will be provided as to whether non-matrimonial property can become matrimonial in the context of divorce proceedings and how it will need to be shared.
How can we help?
If you’re concerned about protecting personal or inherited wealth in a relationship, or you want to review your estate planning in light of this ruling, we are happy to help. Our Family Law solicitors are experts in resolving and negotiating financial arrangements and can advise and guide you through the process.
About the Author
Emily Prince is an Associate Solicitor in our Family Law department, specialising in high net worth divorce and separation cases with international elements across different jurisdictions.
