Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'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 articles
The Legal Rights and Wrongs of Puberty Blocking in England
Hannah Hirst, PhD student, University of Liverpool, School of Law and Social JusticeKeywords: Puberty blockers – children’s rights – access to health – UNCRC –...
Re M (Special Guardianship Order: Leave To Apply To Discharge) [2021] EWCA Civ 442
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Peter Jackson, Baker, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 26 March 2021)Public Law Children – Special guardianship – Leave to apply to discharge SGO – Refusal...
AB v CD & Ors [2021] EWHC 741 (Fam)
(Family Division, Lieven J, 26 March 2021)Medical treatment - Gender Dysphoria – Consent – Young person prescribed puberty blockers – Decision in Bell – Whether parents could...
Re H-N And Others (Children) (Domestic Abuse: Finding of Fact Hearings) [2021] EWCA Civ 448
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), President, King, Holroyde LJJ, 30 March 2021)Private law children - Domestic Abuse – Fact finding – ApproachThe Court of Appeal provided guidance in four...
Unequal chances? Ethnic disproportionality in child welfare and family justice
Many have experienced their own Black Lives Matter moment in the last 12 months, a sharp realisation of entrenched prejudices and inequalities that still exist in our society.In the family justice...
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
Slug : thorne-v-kennedy-why-australia-s-decision-on-prenups-is-important-for-english-law
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : 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