Prenuptial Agreement Upheld – NM v PM [2024] EWFC 199 (B)

By Jenna Brewer

Senior Associate

Tracy Page and Mark Treacy of Nockolds Solicitors recently worked on the husband’s case in NM v PM [2024] EWFC 199 (B)

This was a preliminary hearing in financial relief proceedings to determine whether a prenuptial agreement should be upheld. The husband’s position was that the agreement should be upheld whilst the wife’s position was that to uphold the agreement would be unfair. The major part of the dispute being as to whether properties held in the husband’s sole name and purchased after the prenuptial agreement was signed were matrimonial or non-matrimonial.

Was the prenuptial agreement freely entered into by the parties and was it fair to hold the parties to that agreement? 

The court considered the construction and intention of the prenuptial agreement which was entered into by the parties without the benefit of legal advice and signed the day before the wedding.  Both parties had a legal background but there had not been detailed disclosure, especially in respect of the husband’s pensions, however there had been broad disclosure and the agreement had confirmed that the pensions were ‘substantial’.  The wife had provided the draft agreement which set out that pre-marital assets would remain ringfenced if they were converted to other assets during the course of the marriage.

Also under scrutiny were the parties’ incomes and whether the wife was maximising her earning capacity.

It was held that the prenuptial agreement should be upheld.  Though the agreement had been signed just prior to the wedding, there was evidence to confirm that it had been drawn up at least a month prior to the nuptials and the parties had entered freely into the same.  Also there was clear traceability between the properties purchased by the husband post agreement and his pre-matrimonial assets so pre-matrimonial assets had been converted into a different form.  Though the parties had spent some time in one of the properties as a holiday home it had not ‘matrimonialised’ the property.  A clean break order was also made.

The case underlines the care that needs to be taken when entering into a prenuptial agreement as they can be upheld as fair even where legal advice is not sought prior to signing and they are signed the day before the wedding.

For more information on matrimonial matters or to find out how we can help you, please contact our Family Team on 0345 646 0406 or fill in our online enquiry form and a member of our Team will be in touch.