The UK Supreme Court’s judgment in Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26 marks one of the most significant developments in family law since White v White and Miller/McFarlane. It offers much-needed clarity on the sharing principle in divorce and when non-matrimonial wealth becomes part of the marital pot — a process often referred to as the “matrimonialisation” of assets.
This case involved a 15-year marriage in which the husband had considerable premarital wealth. In 2017, he transferred around £80 million of investments into his wife’s sole name as part of an inheritance-tax planning arrangement, intending that these funds would later be settled into trusts for their children. The trusts were never constituted.
At first instance, the High Court treated the £80 million as matrimonialised and subject to sharing, awarding the wife £45 million. On appeal, the Court of Appeal disagreed, finding that most of the assets remained non-matrimonial, reducing the award to around £25 million and remitting the question of needs.
Finally, the Supreme Court provided guidance on when such assets should be considered part of the marital pool.
Key Lessons from Standish v Standish for Divorce Settlements
Key Lessons from Standish v Standish for Divorce Settlements
The judgment confirms that premarital, gifted and inherited assets, along with any passive growth on them, are generally excluded from sharing unless one party’s needs require access to them. This helps protect individuals who enter marriage with substantial existing wealth.
A Higher Bar for Matrimonialisation
To prove that non-matrimonial assets have become matrimonialised, there must be evidence of sustained, mutual treatment of the asset as shared property. A simple transfer of ownership, or a name change for convenience, will not be enough to establish sharing.
Importance of Documenting Intentions
The Court stressed that recording the parties’ intentions at the time of acquisition or transfer carries considerable weight. Where spouses intend for an asset to remain separate, contemporaneous documentation or nuptial agreements are invaluable. Conversely, where an intention to share exists, that should also be clearly evidenced.
The State of the Law After Standish v Standish
The sharing principle now applies primarily to the fruits of the marital partnership, which are generally divided equally.
By contrast, non-matrimonial property, assets acquired before the marriage or through inheritance or gift, will not be shared, unless the needs of one party or a compensatory factor justify it.
Matrimonialisation Depends on Conduct and Intention
Assets will only cross the line into matrimonial property if there is clear evidence of shared use or joint management over time. Transfers made purely for tax-planning purposes will not automatically result in matrimonialisation.
What the Standish Judgment Means for Family Law Solicitors
This landmark decision reinforces the importance of careful asset management, record-keeping, and legal advice during marriage and divorce.
For family law solicitors and individuals involved in high-value divorce cases, the case provides clearer guidance on how to identify and protect non-matrimonial property within financial remedy proceedings.
The contents of this post do not constitute legal advice and are provided for general information purposes only ■
