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
The Doctrine of Matrimonialisation post-Standish: Three Causes for Concern
[2026] 1 FRJ 61. The Supreme Court decision in Standish has significantly clarified the law of matrimonialisation – the circumstances under which property that is presumed to fall outside the bounds of the marital partnership is deemed matrimonial for the purposes of financial remedies applications.
A Critical Take on Standish
The case of Standish was all about the correct approach to be taken to the concept of ‘matrimonialisation’. This article deals with one question: whether the ‘new test’ announced by the Supreme Court is worse than the ‘old test’ enunciated by the Court of Appeal at the prior stage of proceedings.
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 with many questions left unanswered, and many new questions arising, there is an unshakeable feeling that this was an opportunity missed.
Mr and Mrs Standish have become
Related
The Doctrine of Matrimonialisation post-Standish: Three Causes for Concern
[2026] 1 FRJ 61. The Supreme Court decision in Standish has significantly clarified the law of matrimonialisation – the circumstances under which property that is presumed to fall outside the bounds of the marital partnership is deemed matrimonial for the purposes of financial remedies applications.
A Critical Take on Standish
The case of Standish was all about the correct approach to be taken to the concept of ‘matrimonialisation’. This article deals with one question: whether the ‘new test’ announced by the Supreme Court is worse than the ‘old test’ enunciated by the Court of Appeal at the prior stage of proceedings.
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 with many questions left unanswered, and many new questions arising, there is an unshakeable feeling that this was an opportunity missed.
Mr and Mrs Standish have become
Latest
Portals: Bringing It All Together
Tips and tricks on using the digital court portals from a member of the stakeholder group for the profession, including how to avoid the double login, when to denote documents as confidential, and how to prompt a response from the court.
FRJ – ‘Well, He (or She) Didn’t Ask!’ – the Impact of Non-Disclosure When the Question Isn’t Asked
Is it a shield to non-disclosure by one party during financial remedy proceedings if the other party could (and perhaps should) have asked? The duty on parties to give full and frank financial disclosure is not merely a private obligation between them; it is a duty to the court.
The Reluctant Pension Credit Member
[2026] 1 FRJ 39. In the case of AP v TP [2025] EWFC 190 (B) a financial remedy order was made by consent, following an FDR, which included a pension sharing order in W’s favour. Difficulties began when W failed to provide the necessary information to permit the pension share to be implemented.