The Court of Appeal's very recent decision in the case of Standish has pushed back against the idea that wealth made by one party, but transferred into the name of their spouse, should be subject to the sharing principle in the event of a divorce.  Previously wealth that had been ‘mingled' was at risk of being shared, even if it reflected wealth generated pre-marriage, or wealth received via family gifting or inheritance.  In this case assets worth c.£80 million at the date of the final hearing had been put in the Mrs Standish' name, so that she could settle the funds on trust for their children. Mrs Standish didn't settle the funds,  but did start divorce proceedings whilst the funds remained in her sole name.

The initial judgment gave Mrs Standish £45 million, sharing the wealth transferred to her by her husband. The Court of Appeal sliced £20 million off that award, reducing it to £25 million, a sum that was considered adequate to meet her needs. 

It is still prudent, particularly where significant wealth is involved, to consider a pre or post nuptial agreement to give more control over the financial outcome in a divorce. Time will tell whether this decision will make it easier for wealth transfers between spouses to be undertaken at less risk to the transferring party, should they subsequently go through a divorce, even if they do not have such an agreement.  The transfer of wealth in this case was for a specific purpose and it was not intended to be a gift to Mrs Standish, but for the children.  Where wealth is transferred between spouses for tax efficiency or other reasons, the court could still imply an intention to share if there is no agreement to rebut that presumption.