Under English law, there is no single fixed date for valuing assets in divorce proceedings. The court has discretion to choose an appropriate date based on fairness and the circumstances...
Read more
The treatment of non-matrimonial assets has long been a point of contention in divorce proceedings. As families become more financially complex, particularly where wealth is accumulated before marriage or held for estate planning, there is an increasing need for clarity on what constitutes shared property.
The UK Supreme Court’s recent decision in Standish v Standish marks a significant shift in how these assets are viewed, particularly when wealth is transferred between spouses for non-marital purposes such as tax planning.
This ruling is especially relevant for high-net-worth individuals seeking to ring-fence non matrimonial assets in divorce proceedings. The judgment not only reaffirms the importance of tracing the source and intended use of such assets but also provides greater certainty when dealing with pre-marital assets and complex family wealth structures.
To better understand how this decision may impact your financial settlement, contact our divorce and finances solicitors.
What happened in Standish v Standish?
Case background
Clive and Anna Standish married in 2005 and separated in 2020. In 2017, Clive transferred approximately £77.8 million to Anna. He claimed these funds were pre-marital assets, and the transfer formed part of an inheritance tax-planning strategy intended to benefit their children. Clive believed that Anna would place the money in trust for the children, but she never did.
The dispute over whether this money should be treated as matrimonial or non-matrimonial formed the basis of the proceedings. The High Court initially ruled that the funds were matrimonial assets and awarded Anna £45 million, representing 40% of the total £112 million marital estate.
Clive appealed this decision. The Court of Appeal overturned the ruling, classifying 75% of the assets as non-matrimonial and reducing Anna’s award to £25 million. Anna then appealed to the Supreme Court, leading to the final judgment on 2 July 2025.
Supreme Court Decision (July 2, 2025)
The Supreme Court delivered a unanimous verdict, upholding the Court of Appeal’s decision. It confirmed that the £77.8 million transferred by Clive to Anna retained its status as non-matrimonial assets. Despite the change in legal ownership, the Court found that the underlying character of the funds had not changed.
The Court's reasoning centred on several key principles. Firstly, it reaffirmed that the source of the funds is more important than the legal title when deciding whether assets are matrimonial. In this case, the money originated from Clive’s pre-marital assets and was not intended for joint use.
Secondly, the Court emphasised that the funds had not been “matrimonialised”. Although ownership was transferred, there was no evidence that the money had been treated as shared marital property. The intended use, inheritance tax planning and provision for the children, further supported this classification.
Finally, the judgment serves to clarify the law in this area. It strengthens the understanding of non-matrimonial assets case law, particularly in high-net-worth divorces, offering greater certainty to individuals seeking to protect wealth acquired outside the marriage.
What are non-matrimonial assets?
Non matrimonial assets are typically those acquired by either party before the marriage, inherited, or received as gifts from third parties during the marriage. These differ from matrimonial assets, which are usually accumulated during the marriage and intended for joint use or benefit.
Common examples of pre-marital assets in divorce include property purchased before the relationship began, family businesses, or trusts established before marriage.
The classification can become blurred when such assets are mingled with marital property, used for joint purposes, or held in joint names. In these cases, courts may determine whether the asset has been “matrimonialised”, which generally makes it available for division on divorce.
However, Standish v Standish makes it clear that transfer of ownership does not automatically equal a change in purpose or classification.
What does this ruling mean for clients – practical & legal implications
Clearer asset classification
The ruling provides a stronger framework for distinguishing non matrimonial assets, offering reassurance to those with wealth accrued prior to marriage.
Individuals with significant assets can ring fence non marital assets to better protect them from division, provided the source and original intent are well-documented.
Intent & use as core determinant
Courts will look beyond a formal title. The purpose behind the transfer and how the asset was used will be central to any analysis.
A paper trail showing assets were not intended for joint use can help preserve their non-matrimonial status.
Limits on “Matrimonialisation”
The Supreme Court has narrowed the scope of when and how assets may be reclassified through use or co-mingling.
Even where an asset is shared informally, this does not necessarily override its original classification if clear evidence to the contrary exists.
Section 25 Discretion remains
Importantly, the court’s discretion under Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 is unaffected. Where total assets fall short of meeting both parties’ needs, fairness and financial necessity will continue to guide outcomes.
In lower-asset divorce settlements, the distinction between matrimonial and non-matrimonial property may still carry less weight.
Significance for prenuptials & tax planning
The decision strengthens the case for using prenuptial or postnuptial agreements to define and safeguard premarital assets in divorce.
It also underscores the importance of ensuring that tax-planning decisions, such as those involving asset transfers, are backed by clear documentation and legal advice to prevent misinterpretation in future disputes.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Standish v Standish has shifted the landscape for financial settlements by refining the way matrimonial vs non matrimonial assets are identified and treated on divorce.
It is a welcome development for those looking to protect wealth acquired before marriage or intended for specific non-marital purposes. However, each case will differ depending on the circumstances, and clear evidence of intention remains critical.
A clearer approach to non-matrimonial assets in divorce
The Supreme Court’s decision in Standish v Standish marks an important development in how the courts deal with financial settlements on divorce. It confirms that the original source of an asset carries more weight than who holds the legal title, and that how the asset was used matters. The ruling also sets clearer boundaries around when non-matrimonial assets can be considered part of the marital pot.
While this offers valuable guidance, particularly for those with significant pre-marital assets, it is important to remember that outcomes will still depend on the facts of each case. The court’s discretion under Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 remains central to ensuring a fair result.
Speak to our specialist divorce solicitors at Sharp Family Law
If you are concerned about how non matrimonial assets may be treated in the event of divorce, or wish to take proactive steps to protect them, get in touch with our divorce and finances team.