R&N donate photocopier to local charity

Rogers & Norton Solicitors have recently presented a colour photocopier to Nelsons Journey, the Charity that cares for children who have suffered bereavement in some form or other. The unit will help to speed up their administration tasks.  The copier was originally supplied by Photostatic Copiers and was surplus to the needs of the Solicitors Practice. Graham Knights, Practice Manager for the law firm commented "Nelsons Journey does some fantastic work in the local community without always receiving the recognition it deserves. We are delighted to help in this way by donating the copier to them". Kim Greensmith, Chief Exective Officer of Nelson's Journey said "We are very pleased that Rogers & Norton have helped us in this way as having our own photocopier has already made a difference to our administrative process, saving us time as well as money.  We operate on a relatively small income and every penny counts, in this case every copy counts!"

The photograph above shows Caroline Martin of Photostaic, Kim Chase of the Charity and Graham Knights, Practice Manager for Rogers & Norton at the presentation.

Prenuptials – Where do we stand?

Following the Supreme Court judgment last month we have seen an increased number of instructions regarding prenuptial agreements. We are continually asked whether prenuptials agreements are legally binding and what actually happened in this landmark case of Radmacher (2010).

Background

Katrin Radmacher (40) and Nicolas Granatino (38) married in 1998. The wealthy German heiress thought to be worth more than £100m, wealth which was mainly inherited from her family paper firm, ensured that her husband signed a prenuptial agreement before marriage promising to make no claims on her fortune if the marriage failed. The couple separated in 2006 – the fortune remained, and Granatino, a mature student at Oxford, decided to challenge the prenuptial agreement. The prenuptial had been signed in Germany, where these agreements are enforceable. The parties divorced in Britain and Granatino argued it had no status in English law.

Judgement

The Supreme Court judgment in this case on 20th October 2010 has given explosive recognition to prenuptial agreements when deciding the terms of a divorce. Judges have for many years been willing to take prenuptial agreements into consideration but the Supreme Court went further, describing the contracts as having "decisive weight".

By a majority of 8-1, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal brought by Nicolas Granatino, holding that in this case there were no circumstances that rendered it unfair to hold Granatino to the agreement.

What does this mean?

The decision sees a shift in the status of prenuptials. Although there is now an effective presumption that the agreement will be upheld, assuming the document has been carefully drafted by legal experts. There are exceptions to this rule if one party to the prenuptial has suffered from a material lack of disclosure, information or advice, or if the agreement fails to make adequate provision for dependent children or fail to meet one parties’ reasonable needs.

These exceptions may sound like a loophole but the Court have to take on board these facts before they interfere with a prenuptial that has been freely entered into by consenting adults. 

In this case, Granatino did not have any independent legal advice and interestingly there had also been a lack of disclosure of Radmacher's financial circumstances – factors that would have traditionally led the courts to ascribe less weight to the agreement. That said, the court decided to hold the parties to the agreement. The significant points in this case were that both parties are from other European countries where prenuptials are automatically enforced and the prenuptial was also signed in Germany. This gave the court an indication of their intentions to be legally bound by the terms.

The concern is that this will lead to an exploitation of the vulnerable and financially weaker party, who may find themselves feeling compelled to sign up to a prenuptial agreement, prepared on the other party's terms. This concern can be addressed as long as both parties have the assistance and benefit of independent legal advice at the time of drafting the prenuptial agreement. Lady Hale, who dissented the judgment, was also clear that a prenuptial should be considered as only one of a number of factors contributing to a divorce settlement. 

At present the Law Commission is engaged in preparing a report as to the status of prenuptial agreements. Prenuptials are not as a result of this decision "legal" – that remains a matter for parliament. It does allow those couples who regard prenuptials as a useful way of regulating the consequences of a possible marital breakdown to have more confidence following this Judgment as they will be considered with more weight assuming that they have been carefully drafted and regularly reviewed. 

Statistics and the media continually report that January is the month during which the most divorces are filed. It is therefore essential that if a party is seeking to rely on their prenuptial agreement that they take on board the points raised in this case. Will your prenuptial or postnuptial stand the test of time if it has not been reviewed?  I refer you to our website where more information regarding prenuptials and post-nuptial can be obtained. 

Contact Amy Walpole on ajw@rogers-norton.co.uk or go to http://www.rogers-norton.co.uk/pre-nuptial-post-nuptial-agreements.htm

Written by Amy Walpole Family Solicitor, Partner, who regularly drafts prenuptial and postnuptial agreements.