Quick Links: Thailand Law Seminars and Conference | Thai Law Forum Past Issues | About Thailand Law Forum | Advertising Guidelines | Publishing Guidelines

Feature Articles :

History of Cannabis
  and Anti-Marijuana
  Laws in Thailand

Thailand’s Notable
  Criminal Extradition

Guide for Tourists
  to Laws in Thailand

Neither Free nor Fair:
  Burma’s Sham Elections

Sex Laws in Thailand:
  Part 1

Renewable Energy
  in Thailand

Transsexuals and
  Thai Law

Foreign Mafia in

Thailand Lawyer Blog:
 Thai Government to
  Review Post-2006
 Courts Order Thai
  Military to Cease
  Labeling Transsexuals
  as Mentally Ill
 Work Permit Law
  Changes in Thailand
 Bahamian Supreme Court
  Ruling Backs
  Prenuptial Agreement
  “The Neutron Bomb
  the Global Financial
 The Effects of the US
  Government’s Policies
  on Americans Living
 Chinese Assimilation
  in Thailand vs. Malaysia
 Illegal Wildlife
  Trafficking in Asia:
  Thailand as a Hub?
 Rabbi Enforcing
  Jewish Divorce Order
  Arrested by FBI
 U.S. Prenuptial
  Agreements in Thailand:
  Why Thai Law is
 US Immigration in
 Abortion and Family
  Planning Law in
  the Philippines
 U.S. Courts and the
  Application of Foreign
  Law to International
  Prenuptial Agreements
 Thailand Blasted by 2011
  Human Trafficking Report
 US Expats on Alert:
  New US Tax Law
  Extends IRS’s Reach
 Hangover 2 and
  the Thai Censors
 Thailand’s Film
  Industry Steps Up


International Prenuptial Agreements Part VIII:

The New Developments in the United Kingdom

By Chaninat & Leeds


2 Sepetmber 2011

In the landmark case of Radmacher v. Granatino, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom gave substantial weight to an international prenuptial agreement for the first time in U.K. case law. Prior to the case, U.K. courts had given little to no weight to a couple’s prenuptial agreement in when dividing the couple’s assets. The courts refused to recognize the significance of a couple’s prenuptial agreement based on the grounds that to do so would only incentivize couple’s to separate or divorce. Couples who moved to the U nited Kingdom after signing a valid agreement in another country had no assurance that their agreement would be enforced by a U.K. divorce court. The decision follows a general trend among U.K. courts to recognize a couple’s freedom to contract, however, the long term effects of the decision are not clear. A thorough analysis of the case is required to understand the current state of prenuptial agreements in the United Kingdom. On the other hand, if couples get married in the UK and then seek a divorce in Thailand, they should consult experienced Thailand divorce attorneys to mitigate any issues with a possible prenuptial agreement signed elsewhere.

The U.K. Trend

The Supreme Court followed the general trend among U.K. courts of increasingly allowing spouses the right to contract in regards to marital property. The Maintenance Agreement Act of 1957, made marital agreements valid and legal yet subject to alteration by courts within divorce proceedings. Prior to the act, all marital agreements (including separation agreements) were invalid and had absolutely no effect. (See Bennett v. Bennett) Courts originally read the act narrowly and gave weight to only separation agreements (Edgar v. Edgar). However, in line with the trend in the U.K., courts later expanded this to include postnuptial agreements. (MacLeod v MacLeod) The Supreme Court decision in Radmacher v. Granatino, follows this trend by expanding the couple’s right to contract in regards to the couples assets. The case merely expands the couple’s right to contract to include prenuptial agreements as well as post nuptial and separation agreements.

The Current State 

In Radmacher v. Granatino, the Supreme Court found that a couple’s prenuptial agreement should be given weight by the courts. The court reasoned that the logic which had previously prevented the enforcement of these agreements was no longer valid. The court found that the fear that allowing prenuptial agreements would increase the divorce rate could not outweigh the benefits of predictability and freedom to contract. The court further reasoned that there was no logical reason why post nuptial agreements were enforced yet prenuptial agreements were not. The court held that a prenuptial agreement would be given substantial weight in the court’s division of the couple’s assets unless: the circumstances accompanying the formation of the prenuptial agreement were unfair, or that the foreign aspects of the case indicate that the agreement should not be enforced, or that under the current circumstances it would be unfair to hold the couple to their previous agreement.


Radmacher v. Granatino follows the U.K. trend of expanding a couple’s right to freedom of contract. The immediate effect of the case is to give prenuptial agreements weight in the division of the couple’s assets. Couples with prenuptial agreements who think they may get divorced in the U.K. should consult with legal counsel who has practical experience with prenuptial agreements and the recent U.K. case law.

Related Documents:

International Prenuptial Agreements Part I

International Prenuptial Agreements: Part II

International Prenuptial Agreements: Part III

International Prenuptial Agreements: Part IV

International Prenuptial Agreements: Part V

International Prenuptial Agreements: Part VI

International Prenuptial Agreements: Part VII

Thailand Prenuptial Lawyers

Divorce Law of Thailand

Prenuptial Law in Europe, Australia and the UK

Updated: We have an iron-clad prenuptial agreement and other Myths of the Prenuptial Agreement

US Thailand Lawyer

Thailand divorce lawyers at Chaninat & Leeds specialize in international and complex family law cases

Post Comment >>


Result from image:


© Copyright Thailand Law Forum, All Rights Reserved
(except where the work is the individual works of the authors as noted)