Thirsk v Thirsk & Ors [2026] EWHC 1501 (Ch)
15 May 2026. Cusworth J. The claimant sought reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 following the death of her husband.
Matrimonialisation
BC v BC (No 2) (Matrimonialisation; Division of shareholding; Provision for debt) [2026] EWFC 37
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewfc/2026/37
Sarah Jane Thirsk v Henry Stamford Thirsk & Ors [2026] EWHC 1501 (Ch)
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/ch/2026/1501
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
Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uksc/2025/26