Non-Matrimonial Assets & Divorce Finances | Family Law UK | Kew Law

Non-matrimonial assets and the approach to matrimonialisation

Understanding matrimonialisation after Standish v Standish – a 2025 Supreme Court case involving the transfer of £78 million between spouses – this article explores how non-matrimonial assets can become subject to division on divorce. The division of finances in divorce has been a large topic of debate within the Family Court. Within a financial dispute on divorce, the Court is required to distinguish the difference between assets which are matrimonial in nature and those which are not.

Commonly, the Court has accepted that assets which are obtained by way of a gift or inheritance are not deemed matrimonial in nature. Whilst gifts and inheritance are not the focus of this article, it is important to note that the Court will also assess the needs of both parties; this is where inheritance and gifts may be taken into account when deciding whether these assets should be shared. This article aims to shine a light on how non-matrimonial assets have been dealt with by the Court in recent times, as wells as the effect of the recent case of Standish and Standish (2025).

When Does a Non-Matrimonial Asset Become Matrimonial?

Whilst it may seem obvious as to what assets are pre-matrimonial, being accrued or owned prior to the marriage, does not mean those assets are immune from being matrimonialised. The concept of matrimonialisation is where an asset transitions from being non/pre-matrimonial in nature into being matrimonial. This is common for assets such as properties but can also include income or savings when they are utilised for the benefit of both parties. Whilst one party may be the “breadwinner”, their income will be used for the benefit of the family, thereby causing their income to become matrimonial in nature; the same can also apply to savings.

Standish v Standish: Defining the Limits of Matrimonialisation

This case primarily focused on whether a non-matrimonial asset acquired prior to the marriage might become matrimonialised.

In this case, the parties were married in 2005. Mr Standish was a successful investment banker who retired two years after his marriage to Mrs Standish. As a tax management decision, Mr Standish transferred £78 million to Mrs Standish for her to transfer this money into a trust fund for their children. The reason for this is that Mrs Standish was registered in Jersey (which is free from inheritance tax legislation). However, Mrs Standish never transferred the funds into a trust, thereby causing the issue of debate as to whether the funds became matrimonial in nature due to the monies being transferred between the parties.

Mrs Standish argued that the funds were now hers as they were held in her sole name. Mr Standish argued that the money was transferred as part of tax planning and therefore was not matrimonial in nature.

In the first instance, the Court ruled that whilst the monies were in the name of Mrs Standish at the time, they did not belong solely to her, and they had been matrimonialised in nature. This therefore, meant that they should follow the previously described principle of fairness, meaning that Mrs Standish was awarded a significant share of the money, due to the principle of sharing. This, however, was appealed by both parties, each setting out their own claims.

At the Court of Appeal, Mr Standish’s claim that the money had not become matrimonial in nature was upheld, however, confirming that they had only become partially matrimonialised thereby reducing the Wife’s award. Mrs Standish appealed this decision, claiming that too much weight was given to the husband, being the original source of the money. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the money in question was not matrimonial in nature due to how and when the asset was accrued. The Supreme Court has thereby shown that non-matrimonial assets acquired prior to the marriage are not subject to the sharing principle that the Court traditionally follows.

How This Affects the Division of Assets on Divorce?

Moving forward from this high-net-worth case, you may be asking how this may impact your divorce asset division.

Whilst yes, this is a substantially high net worth case, this precedent set by the Supreme Court is likely to impact matrimonial financial disputes which contain elements of non-matrimonial assets. Whilst in most cases, the quantity of assets will be substantially lower than in this instance, many will have elements of assets owned prior to their marriages. Matrimonialisation will depend on how spouses treat assets over time and what was agreed between the parties. You can read more about how the courts approach this in our guide to deciding the division of assets in divorce.

If you would like to discuss the management of your assets throughout your marriage or you would like to know how this case may impact your divorce finances, our specialist family solicitors are ready to discuss your situation with you.