Let couples use pre-nups and not courts to split cash, says top judge

COUPLES should be able to enter into pre-nuptial agreements before they marry without fear that a court will overrule them, a Supreme Court judge said yesterday.

It is patronising to say they cannot decide before they wed how they should behave if they break up, Lord Wilson added.

Instead, they should be able to choose ‘marriage lite’, in which their pre-nup, and not a divorce court, determines how their wealth is divided if they part.

Lord Wilson said the current law, under which a pre-nup can be put into effect only if a court thinks it is fair, is wrong.

‘We have reached the stage in which, if acting with appropriate care and under- standing, parties should be allowed to elect the sort of marriage which they want,’ he said in a speech at Bristol University.

His comments come nearly seven years after the landmark case of Katrin Radmacher, in which the Supreme Court upheld a pre-nup designed to protect the £100million fortune of the German paper industry heiress after the break-up of her marriage to Nicolas Granatino. Lord Wil- son said yesterday he was ‘not necessarily in agreement’ with Supreme Court deputy president Lady Hale, who said in the Radmacher case prenups should not have legal force because they undermine marriage.

‘Marriage is a public status, conferred by the state; it is still surrounded by various pre-conditions; and it is attended by various economic benefits,’ Lord Wilson said.

He noted that one view is that couples should not therefore be able to opt for ‘marriage lite’, in which a pre-nup overrides other obligations.

But Lord Wilson added: ‘ I wonder whether by modern standards that view is too patronising. Does it make our law inappropriately intrusive into personal, adult arrangements?’