Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articlesrss feeds
More than three quarters of the public would support a new law to end child poverty
A post-election poll by the Children’s Charities Coalition shows 78% of people would support the Government introducing a new parliamentary Bill to eradicate child poverty.There are currently 4.3...
Commissioner says domestic abuse victims must be kept safe amidst response to prison overcrowding crisis
The Government has announced plans to temporarily reduce the point at which prisoners are automatically released from 50% to 40% of their sentence, in response to the overcrowding crisis.This will...
Daniels v Walker – the baseline
Nick Power, BarristerJosephine Garvey, BarristerAn analysis of the court's approach to the instruction of single joint experts and second experts pursuant to Daniels v Walker within financial remedy...
Extra-territorial applications for forced marriage protection orders
Mary Welstead, Visiting Professor in Family law University of Buckingham In 2023, on appeal, Knowles J granted a young woman, who was both a US national and resident, a Forced Marriage...
Declarations of trust and informal variation
Mark Pawlowski, Barrister and Professor Emeritus of Property Law, School of Law, University of GreenwichIt is accepted as established law that, where the parties execute a trust expressly...
View all articles
Authors

Thorne v Kennedy: why Australia's decision on prenups is important for English law

Sep 29, 2018, 22:20 PM
Family Law, prenuptial agreements, undue influence, Thorne v Kennedy, Australia, Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42, [2010] 2 FLR 1900
Title : Thorne v Kennedy: why Australia's decision on prenups is important for English law
Slug : thorne-v-kennedy-why-australia-s-decision-on-prenups-is-important-for-english-law
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Apr 10, 2018, 06:30 AM
Article ID : 116459
English courts have not yet had the opportunity to consider fully what would constitute undue influence in the context of a prenuptial agreement. But knowing when pressure will amount to undue influence in this jurisdiction is still important, not least because calls for contractually binding prenups have resurfaced in recent months.

Even if prenups are not made legislatively binding in the near future, the courts since Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42, [2010] 2 FLR 1900 have taken a fairly restrictive approach when deciding when an imbalance of power between the parties will affect the weight of a prenup on relationship breakdown. This is problematic when the autonomy of one party has been compromised by power inequalities in the relationship, and so a new approach is needed.

For this reason, the ground-breaking approach of the High Court of Australia in Thorne v Kennedy [2017] HCA 49 will be of interest and importance for lawyers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Sharon Thompson's article in the April 2018 issue of Family Law argues that as well as providing guidance on the operation of undue influence in the context of prenups, Thorne crucially opens up the possibility for a broader range of circumstances to be taken into account when giving effect to such agreements. Indeed, the High Court of Australia’s approach can provide inspiration to courts elsewhere showing how agreements can be assessed contextually, without resorting to a paternalistic approach that undermines individuals’ agency in practice.


The full version of this article will appear in the April 2018 issue of Family Law

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of Family Law journal. Please quote: 100482.
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Pre-nuptial_agreement
Product Bucket :
Load more comments
Comment by from