Catherine Currie and Anisha Ali, in our Family Law team, examine the key takeaways from the recent ruling of Standish v Standish.
A landmark ruling from the UK Supreme Court in the case of Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26 has finally clarified how non-matrimonial assets should be treated in divorce, and when or whether they become subject to the sharing principle.
What happened in Standish v Standish?
After more than 20 years of marriage, Mr and Mrs Standish separated and commenced divorce proceedings in 2020. During their relationship, Mr Standish transferred around £77.8 million (until that point always held in his sole name) to Mrs Standish. Once divorce proceedings commenced, he claimed this was solely intended to be for tax planning purposes and the expectation was for Mrs Standish to place the funds in a trust to benefit their children - not a gift or transfer of ownership. The transfer into a trust never happened. Mrs Standish argued that the money was matrimonial, had become part of their joint marital assets, and should be split equally between them subject to the sharing principle (i.e. the concept that the starting point is equal division for assets accumulated during the marriage upon divorce).
In the original decision, the High Court (Moor J) applied the sharing principle and awarded Mrs Standish a £45 million settlement. However, the Court of Appeal disagreed. They found that most of the assets Mr Standish had brought into the marriage were still non-matrimonial and didn’t need to be shared equally. As a result, Mrs Standish’s award was reduced to £25 million. She then took her case to the Supreme Court.
The case came before The Supreme Court in Spring 2025. The Court unanimously rejected Mrs Standish’s argument and upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision to award her a reduced settlement of £25 million. They found the funds remained non-matrimonial. The Court set out the following five key principles that reshape how claims involving non-matrimonial assets and the sharing principle should be approached:
1. Matrimonial vs. Non-Matrimonial Assets
The Court reaffirmed a clear distinction between the two. Matrimonial assets are the result of joint efforts during marriage. While assets such as pre-marital wealth, gifts, or inheritances typically remain non-matrimonial.
2. The Sharing Principle applies to Matrimonial Assets only
The Supreme Court confirmed that the sharing principle does not extend to non-matrimonial property, unless they have been clearly and fully integrated into the marriage and cannot be distinguished.
3. Equal Division as a starting point:
The Court upheld the long-standing sharing principle that matrimonial assets should generally be divided equally between the parties – as a starting point.
4. ‘Matrimonialisation’ requires clear integration:
For non-matrimonial property to become matrimonial, there must be a consistent pattern of joint use or treatment. This means that ownership or transfer alone is insufficient.
5. Tax motive transfers are not automatically sharing:
Moving assets between spouses solely for tax efficiency does not automatically mean an intention to share them as matrimonial property.
What does this mean for divorcing couples?
- Not all assets are automatically shared
Just because your spouse put something in your name (e.g. property, investments, or business interests) does not mean the court will view it as joint and capable of sharing upon divorce - unless there was a clear intention to share. - Tax planning doesn’t mean sharing
Moving assets between spouses for tax or estate planning reasons doesn’t automatically make them part of the marital pot. Courts will consider the purpose and context of the transfer.
- How you use the asset matters
If you and your spouse both treated an asset as a shared resource e.g. using it together or calling it “ours” then the court may decide to divide it - even if it started out as non-matrimonial.
- Protecting wealth requires planning
To keep certain assets ring-fenced, it is important to document your intentions clearly and take specialised advice before and during marriage. Doing so can help reduce potential disputes about gifted or inherited assets, for example, whether or not a relationship subsequently leads to divorce or dissolution. Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements now carry significant weight in court and this case will likely influence and effect how they are drafted and interpreted in respect of distinguishing between different types of property.
Please get in touch with our Family Law team if you would like advice on protecting assets, including nuptial agreements.
For further information or legal advice, please contact law@blandy.co.uk or call 0118 951 6800.
This article is intended for the use of clients and other interested parties. The information contained in it is believed to be correct at the date of publication, but it is necessarily of a brief and general nature and should not be relied upon as a substitute for specific professional advice.
