What’s mine is yours?

On 2 July 2025, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark judgment in Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26 concerning the treatment of non-matrimonial property in financial remedy proceedings.

What is non-matrimonial property? 

Non-matrimonial property is an asset owned by a party before the marriage or received separately, such as an inheritance or a gift. Matrimonial property is an asset acquired during or the product of the marriage and which is subject to the sharing principle upon divorce.

Key issues in the case of Standish v Standish

During the marriage, the husband transferred around £80 million to the wife. The transfer was part of an inheritance tax planning arrangement, intended to benefit their two children through trusts. The trusts were never created, and the wife retained the assets in her sole name at the time of divorce.

The central question therefore was whether this transfer constituted a gift that made the assets matrimonial, or whether they remained non-matrimonial and outside the scope of the sharing principle.

Supreme Court findings 

1. The Supreme Court confirmed that the sharing principle applies exclusively to matrimonial property.
2. A transfer between spouses does not, by itself, render non-matrimonial property shareable.
3. Instead, the classification depends on how the asset was treated by the parties during the marriage which will determine whether the non-matrimonial asset has been matrimonialised.
4. “What is important… is to consider how the parties have been dealing with the asset and whether this shows that, over time, they have been treating the asset as shared between them.” (paragraph 52).
5. The Court also confirmed that although non-matrimonial property should not be subject to the sharing principle, it can still be considered under the principles of needs and compensation.

Ultimately, the Court dismissed the wife’s appeal and affirmed that only 25% of the £80 million was matrimonial property and subject to equal division. The remaining 75% was found to be Mr Standish’s non-matrimonial assets and therefore not subject to the sharing principle.

This is not a new law, but rather a helpful confirmation by the Supreme Court of the clear distinction between non-matrimonial and matrimonial assets and further guidance as to what actions can lead to matrimonialisation of assets.

This is only intended to be a summary of the recent case and not specific legal advice. If you would like further information please contact a member of our team.