The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

pre-nuptials

Im trying to revise for family law but am having trouble with pre-nuptials.
prenuptials are not binding but they may be considered under sec 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act.

Heres my problem.
couples are allowed to consent orders/agreements where basically they agree to how they should divide their assets should they divorce.
So how is this different from pre-nuptials.
I thought maybe its different because pre-nuptials are done before the marriage whereas agreements are done at the time of the divorce, but theres a case called Edgar v Edgar where they made an agreement before the marriage.

Can anyone help
Reply 1
Avatar for SirScally
SirScally
Hiya!

Pre-nups are agreements that are formed prior to the marriage, whereas consent orders are negotiated after the break-up of the marriage. A clue to this is in the name pre-nuptial agreement - i.e. pre-marriage.

Pre-nups have no binding force, whereas consent orders do. But make sure you have it clear in your mind that it is not the agreement of the parties that makes the consent order binding upon them - rather it is the underlying court order that binds them.

Yes, a court must take pre-nups, or indeed any agreement into account under s.25 MCA 1973, as one of the circumstances of the case.

Edgar did not involve a pre-nup. It involved an agreement dividing the assets at the time of separation, that the wife later tried to renege upon. Both parties at the time had been legally advised, and indeed the wife's lawyers had advised her against entering into the agreement. The question for the court was the weight that they should give to any such agreement that had been reached with competent legal advice. So although the principles are applicable to pre-nups, the case itself did not concern a pre-nup.

I hope that is useful to you!!

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you