Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uksc/2025/26
Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Burrows, Lord Stephens, Lady Simler.
Standish v Standish - Find Case Law - The National Archives
Related
Final Reflections on Standish: Was It All Worthwhile?
If asked, Mr Standish may say that three rounds of litigation, with another to follow, were worth it – Mrs Standish, perhaps not. But for lawyers, with many questions left unanswered, and a feeling that the opportunity to settle the law on matrimonialisation with clarity and certainty has passed us by,
![ST v AR [2025] EWFC 4](/content/images/2025/07/picture8986c758de-4404-44d0-8489-6b5411bb3c45.jpg)
ST v AR [2025] EWFC 4
The Husband is 70. The Wife is 51. They have a 9-year-old daughter. They cohabited from February 2003 and in early 2012 separated due to the wife’s affair. In August 2012 – c.9 months later – they reunited. They married on 8 October 2012. In November 2020 the parties relocated
Source not Title: Some First Reflections on Standish
On 15 and 16 November 2023, Standish v Standish came before a Court of Appeal comprising King, Moylan and Phillips LJJ.
189 days later, Moylan LJ delivered the court’s unanimous decision: Mrs Standish’s (‘W’) appeal was dismissed, and Mr Standish’s (‘H’) appeal allowed, subject to the matter
Related
Final Reflections on Standish: Was It All Worthwhile?
If asked, Mr Standish may say that three rounds of litigation, with another to follow, were worth it – Mrs Standish, perhaps not. But for lawyers, with many questions left unanswered, and a feeling that the opportunity to settle the law on matrimonialisation with clarity and certainty has passed us by,
ST v AR [2025] EWFC 4
The Husband is 70. The Wife is 51. They have a 9-year-old daughter. They cohabited from February 2003 and in early 2012 separated due to the wife’s affair. In August 2012 – c.9 months later – they reunited. They married on 8 October 2012. In November 2020 the parties relocated
Source not Title: Some First Reflections on Standish
On 15 and 16 November 2023, Standish v Standish came before a Court of Appeal comprising King, Moylan and Phillips LJJ.
189 days later, Moylan LJ delivered the court’s unanimous decision: Mrs Standish’s (‘W’) appeal was dismissed, and Mr Standish’s (‘H’) appeal allowed, subject to the matter
Latest
Applied Theatre and the Advocacy Gap in Financial Remedies
Closing the gap between legal recognition and judicial persuasion.
War (of the Roses) – What Is It Good For?
The release of a new film has sparked a wave of commentary from the press and family lawyers alike. It shows that bloody mindedness and divorce are a timeless combination. Contains spoilers!
Finality and Funding: The Implications of a Clean Break following CC v UU
The judgment of Peel J in CC v UU [2025] EWFC 214 provides a further glimpse of the LSPO regime, and seeks to establish definitively when the opportunity to seek an LSPO ceases.