K -v- K (Ancillary Relief: Prenuptial Agreement); FD 2003

References: [2003] 1 FLR 120
Coram: R Hayward Smith QC sitting as Deputy High Court Judge
The court set out out a serious of questions to be considered in determining whether or not to uphold the terms of a prenuptial agreement: ‘I distill from the authorities the following questions, which I ask myself in determining the issue whether as against the wife the agreement is binding or influential in any of the decisions I have to make.
1. Did she understand the agreement?
2. Was she properly advised as to its terms?
3. Did the husband put her under any pressure to sign?
4. Was there full disclosure?
5. Was the wife under any other pressure?
6. Did she willingly sign the agreement?
7. Did the husband exploit a dominant position, either financially or otherwise?
8. Was the agreement entered into in the knowledge that there would be a child?
9. Has any unforeseen circumstance arisen since the agreement was made that would make it unjust to hold the parties to it?
10. What does the agreement mean?
11. Does the agreement preclude an order for periodical payments for the wife?
12. Are there any grounds for concluding that an injustice would be done by holding the parties to the terms of the agreement?
13. Is the agreement one of the circumstances of the case to be considered?’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) -v- Granatino SC (Bailii, [2010] UKSC 42, SC, SC Summary, [2010] 2 FLR 1900, [2010] 3 FCR 583, [2010] Fam Law 1263, [2011] 1 All ER 373, [2010] 3 WLR 1367, Bailii Summary)
    The parties, from Germany and France married and lived at first in England. They had signed a pre-nuptial agreement in Germany which would have been valid in either country of origin. H now appealed against a judgment which bound him to it, . .

Leave a Reply