When a couple gets divorced, one of the biggest questions is: How should their money and property be divided? The answer often depends on whether the assets are classed as matrimonial property or non-matrimonial property.
Matrimonial property includes things that the parties have built up or bought during the marriage. This can include the family home, savings, pensions, and anything else either party earned while they were married. Even if only one party earned the money or held the asset in their name, if it was built up during the marriage, it is usually considered to belong to both parties.
Non-matrimonial property, on the other hand, refers to assets that were not created or earned during the marriage. This includes things like:
- Property or savings one party had before the marriage
- Gifts or inheritances received by one party during the marriage
- Family businesses or assets passed down through generations
In general, courts do not automatically divide non-matrimonial property during a divorce – unless needed to make sure both people, and especially any children, are properly provided for.
However, the law is not black and white. Judges have some flexibility, and what counts as fair can change depending on the circumstances.
In past cases the courts said that both parties’ contributions to the marriage – whether financial or otherwise – should be treated equally. Later, the court confirmed that non-matrimonial assets could be included in a divorce settlement if fairness required it, especially after long marriages.
But a more recent case, has given clearer guidance and represents a shift in the court’s approach. In that case, the husband had a large amount of wealth from his family’s business, which he had before the marriage. The court decided that this property did not need to be shared with his wife because:
- It was not earned during the marriage
- It was not used for family purposes
- The wife’s needs could be met without touching that money
The court also said that just being married for a long time does not automatically mean everything should be shared. If the property came from outside the marriage and was not used for the couple’s shared life, it might stay with the party who brought it in.
In Summary
The court’s ruling does not mean that it will disregard fairness in financial remedy cases. While the sharing principle may no longer be applied to non-matrimonial property the court still retains discretion to make provision for financial support based on the needs of the parties and dependent children. This means that a financially weaker party may still receive provision based on factors such as need, rather than a claim for equal sharing of assets.
If you are going through a divorce, it is important to understand what counts as matrimonial or non-matrimonial property, as it can make a big difference to the outcome of your financial settlement. Navigating a financial remedy remains complex. Our team can help you understand your rights and options thereby ensuring you reach a fair outcome. If you are facing a divorce or financial dispute call Manda Toms on 01872 241414.