In the recently decided case of Standish -v- Standish, the Supreme Court addressed a dispute between Clive and Anna Standish over approximately £77-80 million transferred by the husband (Clive) to his wife (Anna) in 2017, as part of a tax-planning scheme that was devised to benefit their children. Subsequently, the marriage ended in 2020, and the question that then followed was whether these assets – which orginated from the husband’s premarital wealth – had become over time matrimonial property and so in the matrimonial pot to be divided upon divorce and separation.
The Supreme Court has now decided that:
-
Non-matrimonial property comprises assets brought into the marriage — through inheritance, gifts, or prior earnings—and is not subject to the equal-sharing principle in divorce
-
Matrimonial property, by contrast, arises from the couple’s joint efforts during the marriage and is normally divided equally (a 50/50 split), subject to fairness under Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
The “Matrimonialisation” Concept refers to the process by which non-matrimonial assets can become matrimonial if over time they are treated by both spouses as shared assets—for example, by investment in the family home, commingling, or joint usage.
However, the mere transfer of title — for example, for the purpose of tax planning—does not automatically transform the asset into matrimonial property.
The Supreme Court held ultimately that the husband’s earlier transfer of £77.8 million remained non-matrimonial, as the asset was not treated as joint or used for marital purposes; the transfer was executed for tax reasons and children’s benefit only.
The High Court’s first decision that the asset was matrimonial was overturned and the decision of the Court of Appeal later, which found it to be 75% non-matrimonial and 25% matrimonial in nature, was not interferred with, resulting in the wife receiving £25 million in total — was upheld by the Supreme Court.
In summary, the case confirms that:
- Only matrimonial property is to be shared equally; non-matrimonial property is not subject to division unless based on needs or compensation
- Individuals can rely on the ruling to preserve wealth built before marriage, so long as it hasn’t been matrimonialised through shared treatment with the spouse
- By defining matrimonialisation narrowly, the judgment allows clearer guidance for prenuptial and postnuptial agreements—essential tools for asset protection in high-net-worth and everyday contexts
If you’re concerned about how your assets might be treated in a divorce—or want to take steps to protect your wealth—our expert family law team is here to help. Contact us today for clear, confidential advice tailored to your circumstances.