Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Assets placed in respondent's name were not matrimonialised, remained applicant's non-matrimonial funds, and division should be based on respondent's needs rather than sharing principle. No evidence of gifting or shared treatment over time. Respondent's needs are met by award; remainder stays with applicant.
Source excerpt
A v Z [2026] EWHC 654 (Fam) (23 February 2026)
Financial remedy judgment upholds a prenuptial agreement, orders a clean break, and requires compensatory payment for transferred shares in family companies.
Wife's entitlement to matrimonial assets is reduced to 30% of combined value due to lack of financial contribution and egregious conduct, including coercive control, fraud, and abuse. Payment of £750,000 from husband to wife, with wife retaining Leicester property and other assets, achieves fair outcome and meets wife's needs.
Source excerpt
The deliberate non-disclosure by the wife of the majority of her assets amounted to fraudulent misrepresentation, vitiating the pre-nuptial agreement. The agreement cannot stand as the husband was deprived of information agreed as necessary for decision-making. The judge erred in law by failing to properly address the impact of non-disclosure and the needs assessment must be reconsidered without reference to the agreement.
Source excerpt
The agreement reached in 2001/2002 was freely entered into, implemented, and not vitiated by non-disclosure or undue pressure. The lengthy delay and absence of causal link between applicant's needs and the marriage, combined with the parties' intention for a clean break, render any financial award inappropriate. All claims are dismissed and a clean break is ordered.
Source excerpt
LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473 (22 November 2025)
Financial remedy case where the wife’s conduct, deception, and lack of contribution reduced her share of matrimonial assets to a £750,000 award.
Wife's financial award determined by needs assessment, not sharing claim, due to non-matrimonial origin of husband's assets. Husband's inherited investments are illiquid, intended for future generations, and not matrimonialised. Wife awarded lump sum to rehouse and capitalised income, plus enhancement and costs, reflecting standard of living and fairness, but not parity with husband's wealth.
Source excerpt
The assessment did not apply an unlawful destitution or homelessness threshold, was sufficiently forward-looking, did not unlawfully require voluntary return to Zimbabwe, and was not irrational; any flaws were immaterial and did not affect the outcome.
Source excerpt
Helliwell v Entwistle [2025] EWCA Civ 1055 (31 July 2025)
The Court of Appeal held that deliberate non-disclosure of substantial assets vitiated a prenup, set aside the order upholding it, and remitted needs for reconsideration.
Adodo v Tan [2025] EWFC 184 (B) (27 June 2025)
Financial remedy rehearing after appeal over CPF funds and Singapore property. The court ordered equal sharing of the Leicester home, a discounted share of Singapore assets, and a clean break.
Explore more
