Radmacher v Granatino
The court should give effect to a prenuptial agreement that is freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation of its implications, unless it would not be fair to hold the parties to it.
Facts
Ms Radmacher, a wealthy German heiress, and Mr Granatino, a French banker, married in London. Before the marriage, they signed a prenuptial agreement in Germany, which provided that neither would make any claim against the other on divorce. Mr Granatino later gave up banking to become a research student. When the marriage broke down, he applied for financial relief. The judge awarded him about 5.5 million pounds, giving limited weight to the agreement, but the Court of Appeal gave the agreement decisive weight and reduced the award.
Legal principle
The Supreme Court dismissed Mr Granatino's appeal, Lady Hale dissenting. The majority said that the court should give effect to a nuptial agreement that is freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation of its implications unless in the circumstances prevailing it would not be fair to hold the parties to their agreement. The court should respect the autonomy of the parties, especially where the agreement deals with existing circumstances, but the agreement would not be allowed to prejudice the reasonable needs of any children. Mr Granatino had understood the agreement, and it was fair to hold him to it, although provision was made for his role as a father.
Related cases on financial remedies on divorce
- Barder v Caluori [1988] AC 20
- Charman v Charman (No 4) [2007] EWCA Civ 503, [2007] 1 FLR 1246
- Edgar v Edgar [1980] 1 WLR 1410
- Gohil v Gohil [2015] UKSC 61, [2016] AC 849
- Jones v Jones [2011] EWCA Civ 41, [2012] Fam 1
- Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24, [2006] 2 AC 618
- Mills v Mills [2018] UKSC 38, [2018] 3 WLR 1170
- Sharland v Sharland [2015] UKSC 60, [2016] AC 871
Studying family law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
