Divorce

About one-third of all UK marriages are second marriages. If you are in a second marriage or planning one, you need to know about Wills, estate planning and second marriages. Get in Touch With us Today for Will and Estate Planning Advice. The impact of a second marriage on your Will When you get married for a second time, your remarriage cancels your Will. You are treated as dying without a Will if you remarry and do not make: A new Will specifically said to be made in contemplation of your second marriage, or A new Will made after your second marriage. Dying without a Will is also called dying intestate. First Wills and second marriages If you do not make a new Will when or after you remarry, the relatives who were going to receive your estate under your first Will won't be able to use your first Will to obtain probate and won't receive their legacies under that Will. Instead, to get a share of your estate, they will either need to: Rely on the intestacy rules on estate distribution, or Bring a claim against your estate. The estate claim could bring them into conflict with your second husband or wife or other relatives receiving your estate under the intestacy rules. The intestacy rules and second marriages The intestacy rules say that if you die without a valid Will, your estate is distributed as follows: If you are married with children (from a first or later marriages or relationships), your surviving husband or wife gets the first £322,000 of your estate and all your personal items (chattels). The rest of your estate is divided equally between your spouse and your child. If you have more than one child, the children share the remainder equally. If you are married but do not have children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren, all your estate is inherited by your second husband or wife. An example of intestacy rules and blended families Take the example of Mike, who married Claire. It's the second marriage for both, and they each have three children from earlier relationships and first marriages. Mike dies after only 12 months of marriage to Claire. He leaves an estate worth £900,000. Out of the £900,000 pot, Claire receives £611,000. Mike’s three children share the remaining £289,000, with each receiving around £96,000. In her new Will, Claire is free to leave the £611,000 inheritance from Mike to her three children from previous relationships. The complications of intestacy rules and second marriages If you have married for a second time and have not updated an earlier Will, your Will is cancelled, and the intestacy rules apply to the distribution of your estate. The intestacy rules are rigid and inflexible. They can't be adjusted to fit your family's circumstances. Although the intestacy rules cannot be changed, some people have the right to apply to the court for reasonable financial provision from the deceased’s estate because the intestacy rules did not provide them with any or sufficient money. Unfortunately, a claim against the estate can add to the anguish experienced by a family after a bereavement and pit a widow or widower against the rest of the family. Take the example of Mike and Claire again. Claire is told three people are claiming a share of the money due to be distributed to her under the intestacy rules: Mike’s former wife is bringing a claim against the estate because Mike paid her spousal maintenance. She has grounds to bring a claim as Mike's dependent former spouse. Mike’s adult son is disabled and says the £96,000 isn’t a reasonable financial provision because whilst he needs somewhere to live, Claire is due to get £611,000 and already has her own house, pension and savings. Mike’s youngest daughter is going to university and says she needs financial help from her dad’s estate to support her through university. These claims could be expensive to resolve, and it could take a long time for the estate to be distributed. Your views on whether the intestacy rules are fair may be coloured by factors such as: Mike and Claire jointly owned a family home. The house is valued at one million. As Mike and Claire bought the house as joint tenants, Claire gets the house under the right of survivorship. That means she inherits Mike’s 500,000 of equity in the property and the £611,000 under the intestacy rules. Mike had a few pensions at the time of his death. As he had not completed any pension nomination forms, Claire will receive the pension income and be able to draw down funds as his widow. Mike and Claire signed a prenuptial agreement before their wedding. The agreement said that neither Claire nor Mike would have a claim to the other’s money if they divorced within three years of their marriage. Although the couple were only married for 12 months before Mike’s death, the prenuptial agreement does not apply as it only governs how their assets are divided if they divorce. Writing a new Will when you are part of a blended family  Will solicitors are told that a common reason for delay in making a Will after a second marriage is the fear of getting the contents wrong and creating unfairness between a new spouse and stepchildren or between half-siblings. Lawyers specialising in Wills know that balancing the needs of a second spouse with those of adult or young children, as well as any extended family or charitable bequests that may have featured in an earlier Will signed before the second marriage, can be hard. Talking to a Will solicitor can help you understand your options and provide information on how a new Will can include flexible provision and can be written in a way that caters for the needs of a second spouse and any children or other dependants. Protecting your spouse and children When it comes to writing second marriage Wills, the priorities of the Will maker are usually: To be fair. To meet the needs of family members. To provide flexible provision because the needs of individual family members are likely to change between the date of the Will and the date the Will maker passes away. The priorities can usually be met with a specialist second marriage Will. These types of Will often include: Creation of a discretionary trust in the Will, or A life interest in all or part of the estate for the second spouse, or The second spouse is given the right to live in the family home for life or for a specified period. The timing may depend on the length of the second marriage or other family circumstances. These provisions all create flexibility and allow a Will maker to balance the needs of their spouse, any children and wider family members. You might also be interested in [related_posts]   The timing of Wills and second marriages Ideally, if you are getting married for a second time, you need to take some legal advice on the paperwork that should be prepared before your ceremony. These documents include: A prenuptial agreement. A Will made in contemplation of your forthcoming marriage. A Lasting Power of Attorney for financial affairs and a Health & Welfare Lasting Power of Attorney. Pension nominations. Life insurance nominations. If you are in a flurry about wedding plans and don’t get around to all the recommended pre-wedding paperwork, you can sign a postnuptial agreement and a new Will after your marriage. Wills in contemplation of marriage A Will made in contemplation of a planned wedding needs to be signed within a reasonable timeframe of the planned ceremony. You can't make a Will expressed to be in contemplation of marriage if you are in a new relationship and have not set a wedding date, or if you are planning a long engagement. If you are in a serious relationship and you want to leave a new partner a legacy, your Will solicitor may be able to prepare a codicil to your existing Will. Advice on Wills and second marriages Our Will solicitors provide specialist advice on estate planning, second marriages and blended families. We will listen to you to understand your priorities and offer guidance on how to structure your Will and estate planning to meet the needs of your family. Get in Touch With us Today for Will and Estate Planning Advice.

Traditionally, it was seen as necessary to have a divorce lawyer in your corner.  Helping you fight to gain custody of your children and the best financial settlement. The concept of a divorcing couple placing their trust and confidence in one family lawyer is relatively new. Some couples embrace the idea, whilst others are understandably wary. In this article, our family law solicitors outline how an amicable divorce works through Evolve Family Law's One Lawyer Divorce Service. Contact Evolve Family Law Today for Divorce and Family Law Advice.   What is one-lawyer divorce? The One Lawyer Divorce Service is a simple concept; a husband and wife instruct one family law solicitor rather than two lawyers. The lawyer listens to both husband and wife, then helps you facilitate an agreement and converts the agreement into the documents you need to: Obtain a no-fault divorce. Record the parenting arrangements for your children. Provide you with a binding financial settlement. Obtaining a no-fault divorce using the amicable divorce service The government reduced animosity in the divorce process by introducing no-fault divorce proceedings. That doesn’t mean one spouse isn't at fault for the breakdown of the marriage, or that one or both spouses aren't upset, emotional, or angry.  However, removing fault from the legal process was intended to make it less adversarial. This has been achieved through: The ground for obtaining a divorce is that the marriage has irretrievably broken down – no one needs to prove fault. The couple can jointly or individually apply for the divorce. There are very limited grounds to oppose a divorce – you can't oppose the divorce even if you don’t think the marriage is over. There is no need to attend a court hearing to obtain your final order of divorce. The court won't make divorce costs orders unless the circumstances are exceptional. The advantages of using one lawyer rather than two Using a single lawyer to file your joint divorce can help: Minimise legal costs, and Reduce animosity to help you reach a financial settlement. You agree on parenting arrangements and to co-parent as the One Lawyer Service reduces animosity. You might also be interested in [related_posts] Agreements and the use of the One Lawyer Service The Amicable Divorce One Lawyer Service at Evolve Family Law can help you with: Recording your parenting agreement in a parenting plan or by securing an agreed child arrangement order. Converting a separation agreement into a financial consent order. Converting a memorandum of understanding reached in family mediation into an agreed and binding financial court order. Obtaining a financial court order after you have negotiated a financial settlement between the two of you. Some people believe they can only use the Amicable Divorce One Lawyer Service after reaching a financial settlement and an agreement on the residence and contact arrangements for their children. That’s not the case. You do not have to have reached a parenting or financial agreement before instructing the One Lawyer Service at Evolve Family Law. Using the One Lawyer Service when you have not reached a financial or parenting agreement You may think that it is essential for you and your spouse to have your own divorce solicitors if you have been unable to negotiate a financial or childcare agreement. You may be right. However, in some family situations, it makes sense to use the One Lawyer Service even though you have been unable to reach a full agreement. Using the One Lawyer Service when you have not reached a financial or parenting agreement may be cost-effective and productive, where you: Trust your ex-spouse’s financial disclosure. Know there are no risk factors, such as the safety of your child or previous domestic abuse. Know that you are both committed to reaching a financial settlement. Are both receptive to taking advice on board and to reaching a compromise. Are both willing to explore the stumbling block to reaching a financial settlement. Examples of where the One Lawyer Amicable Divorce Service can help include: One or both of you have pensions, but you are not sure how a pension sharing order works or how pension offsetting could help you both get to a fair financial outcome for both of you. You inherited money after your separation, and you and your spouse both want to understand the relevance of the inheritance to the divorce financial settlement. You have adult children living at home, and you both don’t know how their needs will be factored into the financial settlement. You are struggling to understand the interplay between voluntary child support, top-up child maintenance, and court-ordered spousal maintenance. You signed a prenuptial agreement in the hope that if you separated, the divorce and financial settlement would be amicable. However, your circumstances or your spouse's have changed since the prenuptial agreement was signed. If you and your estranged spouse are both able to take on board the neutral advice of a family lawyer specially trained in providing a One Lawyer Service, then the option of using one lawyer may be a quicker and more cost-effective solution for you. How the One Lawyer Service works when you do not have a financial agreement Consider a couple keen to reach a financial settlement but unsure how to manage their pensions and whether to include pension sharing in the agreement. If they elect to use the One Lawyer Divorce Service and the lawyer screens both as suitable to engage in the amicable divorce process, the lawyer will talk to them both about: The relevance of pensions to their divorce settlement. The pension options, including pension sharing and offsetting. The pension valuations and the instruction of a pension actuary. Potential court outcomes if the court were making a financial court order after a contested hearing. The steps to obtain a financial court order and pension sharing order annexe. Obtaining a financial court order and implementing the pension sharing order. Two traditional divorce solicitors would have similar conversations with their clients in separate lawyers’ offices. In an amicable divorce, a neutral lawyer providing a One Lawyer Divorce Service may explain that a pension sharing order is likely and that the percentage of the pension share could range from 40% to 60% if the couple left the judge to decide on the pension split. The couple, armed with information on the value of 20% of the pension fund and the total costs and timescales of court litigation, may feel it is sensible and fair to compromise on a 50% pension-sharing order after hearing the neutral information provided during the One Lawyer Divorce Service. Screening and the One Lawyer Divorce Service Screening is an essential part of the amicable divorce process. If thorough screening is not conducted, you may waste time and money by committing to the service. The specialist amicable divorce solicitor will probably say that the two of you should not use the One Lawyer Divorce Service if: There is a significant power imbalance between you and your estranged spouse. One of you does not see the need for financial disclosure of assets. One spouse has entrenched views and appears unwilling to agree to any compromise. There was domestic abuse in the relationship. Your child could be at risk of harm. There may be other reasons the service is not appropriate for you. An experienced divorce lawyer trained in providing the One Lawyer Divorce Service can screen and advise you of your alternate options. Key takeaways on the One Lawyer Divorce Service The Evolve Family Law One Lawyer Divorce Service is: Cost-effective when compared to other methods of non-court alternative dispute resolution or traditional court proceedings. Quicker than applying for a child arrangement order or financial order and waiting for court dates. Flexible, as the process can work at your pace and can involve other experts as required, such as a pension expert or property valuer. Bespoke to what you both want and need out of the process. Less adversarial and non-confrontational compared to traditional court proceedings and some other forms of non-court alternative dispute resolution. Get in Touch With us Today for Information on the One Lawyer Divorce Service.  

You may need a freezing order if your estranged or ex-spouse is selling or transferring assets to try to reduce the amount of money available for distribution in planned or ongoing divorce financial proceedings. Family law and freezing order solicitors can help you navigate the process of applying for a freezing injunction and assist you in securing a financial settlement and court order. Get in Touch With us Today.  Freezing orders There are several types of freezing orders, including Section 37 injunctions and Mareva injunctions. These court orders can be applied for as part of a financial remedy application started by a husband, wife or civil partner. The injunction order freezes assets to prevent them from being sold or transferred before a spouse can obtain a financial court order to split the family assets fairly. You do not need to be the applicant in the financial remedy application to apply for an injunction order. However, often the applicant for a freezing injunction starts financial remedy proceedings at the same time as their injunction application. A spouse can also apply for a freezing order mid-way through a financial remedy application if they discover that their estranged or former spouse is intending to transfer or sell assets discovered during the financial disclosure process. Alternative safeguards to freezing orders The family court views freezing injunctions as a draconian measure of the last resort. Family lawyers will therefore consider the alternatives to applying for a freezing injunction. Alternatives to a freezing injunction may save money, reduce court animosity, and avoid the risk that the court will say the threshold for securing an injunction is not met. The alternatives to a freezing order depend on the assets needing protection and the extent of the other family assets. A freezing order solicitor can carefully look at all the options, including: Working out the estimated value of the family assets and non-family assets to see if an injunction application is justified. Writing to the spouse explaining the potential consequences of selling or disposing of assets and the adverse inferences the court will be asked to make against the spouse in the financial court proceedings. Asking the spouse to give an undertaking or promise not to sell or dispose of an asset until an agreed financial settlement is reached or the court makes a financial court order. Asking a bank to freeze a bank or an investment account. Asking the land registry to place a notification on the property register to help stop the owner of land from being able to sell or remortgage it. Divorce solicitors can help you work out the most cost-effective solution to preserve assets until the final hearing of a financial settlement application. Assets that a freezing injunction can freeze An injunction can freeze many types of assets, provided the injunction applicant has evidence to justify the court making the order. Freezing injunction orders are typically made to stop the sale or the transfer of: Bank accounts. Property or land. Investments, stocks and shares. Shares in a family business or company assets to prevent asset stripping. Expensive items, such as gold or jewellery.   The steps to obtain a freezing order    The procedure to obtain a freezing injunction can be broken down into five steps: Injunction application and supporting statement explaining why the freezing order is being sought. Ex parte or without notice hearing for the court to decide if an urgent freezing injunction is necessary without the respondent first being made aware of the application and initial court hearing. Application and any interim order are served on the respondent with a hearing date (called a return date) for the respondent to attend and oppose the injunction order being made or from continuing. The respondent lodges a statement if they oppose the injunction being made or continuing. The respondent may decide that they don’t object to the order freezing an asset, but they may say the wording of the order is impracticable because it doesn't allow them to pay their reasonable living expenses or to operate their business. The injunction hearing with the respondent present takes place, and the judge decides if the freezing order should be made or continue until the date of the final hearing of the financial application.   If the court makes a freezing order, the order must be served on the respondent and any other relevant persons or organisations, such as the respondent’s bank if the order relates to a bank account. You might also be interested in [related_posts]   Do you need a freezing injunction? A freezing injunction solicitor can assess whether an application is justified and whether the court is likely to make the order in the terms sought. Using an example is the best way to illustrate whether a freezing order application should be pursued. The freezing injunction example Mike has a house worth £2m, a business worth £3m, and joint bank accounts with his wife, Claire, with a balance of £2m. All the assets total around £7m. Mike is selling his shares in his business to his brother for £2m. Claire thinks that it is a sale at an undervaluation because she thinks the shares are worth an extra £1m. She believes Mike thinks he is being clever and that he plans to get his brother to transfer the shares back to him once a financial court order is made, in the process avoiding giving her an extra £500,000, half the additional value in the shares. She wants a freezing injunction to stop Mike from selling his shares. As the house is the family home, Claire can ask her divorce lawyers to register a notice with the Land Registry to prevent it from being sold or remortgaged. As the bank account is a joint account, the bank can be asked to freeze the account. Potentially, Claire can safeguard assets of up to £4m without applying for a freezing order, and £4m, based on Claire’s knowledge of the business, is over half the value of all the family's assets. Claire’s divorce solicitor can write to Mike’s financial settlement lawyer to explain that if Mike goes ahead with the transfer of shares to his brother at an undervalue, Claire will argue that Mike should be attributed as getting £3m rather than £2m for the shares, as that is the actual value of the shareholding. Therefore, Mike’s ploy won't work, and by his actions, he will unnecessarily increase the costs of the financial remedy proceedings, risking a cost order being made against him and the freezing of the joint bank account. Claire may still prefer to apply for a freezing order to stop the sale of the shares, but she understands her options and how she can safeguard over 50% of the family's assets without one. The divorce lawyer’s advice on the advisability of applying for a Section 37 injunction may depend on whether Claire was married for 3 or 30 years and whether Mike and Claire signed a prenuptial agreement ringfencing Mike’s shareholding in his family business. Do you need substantial family assets to justify applying for a freezing order? Some people think that you can only justify a freezing injunction application if a former spouse is a high-net-worth individual who is intending to sell or dispose of assets worth more than £1m. That’s not the case. If the family assets are modest, an injunction application may be imperative. Preventing an ex-spouse from dissipating £100,000 of family assets by obtaining a freezing injunction may make the difference between a spouse having enough money to buy a new property from their financial settlement or being stuck in rented accommodation because they do not have a large enough lump sum to put down as a deposit on a new house purchase. Each family situation needs careful assessment, and spouses need advice tailored to their personal and financial circumstances so they can weigh up the pros and cons of applying for a freezing injunction. Freezing orders and asset ownership Securing a freezing order over an asset does not mean that the ownership of the asset will be transferred at the date of the injunction hearing or that the asset will be ring-marked for you in the final hearing of the financial settlement application. A freezing order is intended to serve as a neutral, temporary measure pending a financial court order. The order freezes the asset as a holding measure. In some situations, the injunction to stop the sale or transfer of an asset or the movement of money overseas is vital if you are going to get a fair financial settlement. In other scenarios, a Section 37 injunction would be ideal but not critical. How freezing orders work How freezing orders work depends on the asset being frozen. For example, if Claire decides she wants to apply for a Section 37 injunction to stop Mike selling his shares in the family business to his brother, then she does not want the freezing order to have the effect of freezing the company. That would not be in her interests or those of the company's employees, as the order could render the company's shares valueless by the date of the final hearing of her financial settlement application. Freezing orders can be worded so a business can still operate, or if they relate to a personal bank account, the freezing injunction can be phrased so the bank account holder can pay existing standing orders and their usual and reasonable living expenses. Speak to freezing order solicitors in the North West You need specialist freezing order advice if you are worried about family assets disappearing or if you are facing what appears to be aggressive tactics to secure an injunction in circumstances where you have no intention to fritter away assets, and your ex has unfounded suspicions about historical business or personal financial transactions. At Evolve Family Law, our expert divorce and financial settlement solicitors can advise you on the grounds for a freezing order, represent you in the injunction application and financial settlement proceedings. Get in Touch With us Today.

Family solicitor Robin Charrot examines divorce and inheritance and offers advice on how the court resolves divorce financial settlements involving inheritances. Get in Touch With us Today. Divorce and inheritance issues For many young couples, it is a real struggle to get on the property ladder. The combination of house prices and the increase in the cost of living has made homeownership an uphill battle for most young married couples. Frequently, parents and in-laws provide gifts or loans to help young families buy their first home or move to a larger family home. Alternatively, a young couple may be helped if one of them receives a substantial inheritance from a parent or grandparent. When a couple separates and initiates no-fault divorce proceedings, one stumbling block to reaching an agreed financial settlement is where either spouse has received an inheritance or is likely to receive a substantial legacy in the future. Protecting inheritance from divorce There are ways to protect an inheritance from divorce financial claims. Examples of how to protect an inheritance from a financial claim include: Signing a prenuptial agreement. Signing a postnuptial agreement. Creating a discretionary trust. Keeping the inheritance separate. Relationship agreements and protecting inheritances A prenuptial agreement is relevant if you are engaged and have not married. If you are married, you can sign a postnuptial agreement to protect assets from divorce financial claims. Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements can be limited to ringfencing the inheritance, so the spouse who inherited the money from their side of the family keeps it if the couple splits up. Alternatively, the agreement can be comprehensive and set out your agreed financial settlement in the event of a separation. Either type of relationship agreement only works if safeguards are in place to protect both parties, such as financial disclosure and independent legal advice. Trusts and protecting inherited monies The creation of a discretionary trust can be effective in protecting an inheritance from divorce claims. Setting up a discretionary trust requires specialist private client and estate planning advice. Inherited monies classed as non-family wealth  If you have received an inheritance, one way to keep it out of any future divorce financial settlement is to decide not to share the money with your spouse. This strategy does not always work. Whether it is feasible to keep money separate depends on the extent of your other assets, the length of your marriage, and several other factors. Keeping inherited money separate from your husband or wife means keeping it in a sole account, not placing it in a joint account, and not using it to pay off the mortgage on the family home or to invest in the family business. The court will decide in financial court proceedings whether the money falls within the definition of family money or is non-family wealth. The asset can also be referred to as a non-marital asset. If a court concludes that an inheritance qualifies as a non-marital asset, the court will not share the inheritance as part of the financial settlement unless it is necessary to do so. It will be necessary to do so if your spouses' and the children's needs cannot be met without recourse to the non-marital asset. Non-family wealth – the practicalities Family lawyers recognise the difficulties of keeping inherited money separate from shared funds. Keeping an inheritance separate from your wife's funds or in your sole account may conflict with financial advice or tax advice. For example, from a financial standpoint: It may be best to pay off the mortgage on the jointly owned family home mortgage rather than keep your inheritance in a bank account or in investments in your sole name, or From an income tax perspective, it may be best to make use of your ISA allowance and the ISA allowance of your husband or wife. The professional legal, financial, and tax advice is correct but conflicting. That’s because each professional addresses the inherited funds from different angles. A family law solicitor can assist you in working out the option that best suits your needs and priorities. You might also be interested in [related_posts]   Inheritances and financial disclosure when negotiating a financial settlement In financial settlement negotiations and court proceedings, there is often an assumption that inherited money or inheritance and trust prospects do not need to be disclosed to your spouse or to the court. However, all husbands and wives must provide complete and frank financial disclosure. If you do not disclose an inheritance, it can result in: Your spouse being suspiciousabout other financial aspects, such as the value of the family business or the extent of your income. This suspicion makes it less likely that you can reach an agreed divorce financial settlement. In the financial proceedings, the court being asked to make inferences about your honesty. The court could be asked to infer that you have additional undisclosed wealth because you did not initially disclose the existence of an inheritance or a trust. If a financial court order is madeand it subsequently comes to light that you had received an inheritance or were a discretionary beneficiary of a trust, your spouse can ask the court to review the order and make a new one based on the argument that the court would not have made the original order if you had disclosed the existence of the inheritance or the trust. Family solicitors recommend that if you have received an inheritance or if you are named in a Will or a trust, you discuss your financial disclosure with a specialist divorce financial settlement solicitor before you start financial settlement negotiations, attend family mediation, or complete Form E financial disclosure as part of the divorce financial settlement court process. Disclosure of inherited monies and inheritance prospects Even if the advice is that you must disclose the inheritance, you can still argue that the inheritance should not be considered in the divorce financial settlement. For example, because you have not received the legacy yet and the testator may change their Will or because although the inheritance has been received, the inherited money did not become marital property because of the existence of a prenuptial agreement or as a result of the money being kept separate. Many future inheritances can be safely ignored and will be disregarded by the court. For example, if you are getting divorced in your 20s and your parents have named you as a beneficiary of their Wills but they are in their 60s and fit and healthy. Why? Firstly, you may not inherit for another 30 years, and secondly, by the date of their death, they may have spent your legacy or decided to leave it to a charity. The relevance of a future inheritance may be different if you and your spouse are in your 60s and you are divorcing after 30 years of marriage. An imminent inheritance could be relevant if there is insufficient equity in the family home to rehouse you both or to meet your retirement needs. The inheritance could mean your spouse gets more of the equity or pension share than would have been the case if you were not due to imminently receive a substantial inheritance or had recently received it. Divorce, inheritance and protecting family wealth Divorce and inheritance can be a very emotional topic. Invariably, people want to protect an inheritance because they believe it is family money left to them and that their relative would not want their estate shared with their former spouse. Divorce financial settlement solicitors and estate planning lawyers can guide you and your family on your options.   For expert advice on divorce and family law, call our team of specialist divorce lawyers or complete our online enquiry form.

Living with a husband or wife who has dementia can be more than some spouses can cope with, especially when there were marital difficulties before the diagnosis. Although there is an increasing amount of support available and understanding of the impact of a dementia diagnosis on the family, for some spouses, the right option is separation or divorce. At Evolve Family Law, our divorce solicitors have advised several spouses who have contemplated separating or divorcing after their spouse has received a diagnosis of dementia. Many are loath to seek legal advice, as they fear judgment from family, a divorce lawyer, or the court. It is an impossible situation, and we recommend seeking specialist legal advice to understand your options. Contact Evolve Family Law for specialist divorce legal advice. Divorce proceedings and dementia Whether or not the dementia diagnosis played any part in the reasons for the marriage breakdown, there are likely to be feelings of guilt about applying for a divorce and worry about how a spouse who is ill will face the future. There is also likely to be a concern that you will not meet the legal criteria for a divorce. With the introduction of no-fault divorce proceedings, all you need to show to obtain a divorce is that, in your opinion, the marriage has irretrievably broken down. Your spouse does not need to agree with you, and in most cases, there are no grounds on which they can oppose the divorce. If you are worried that your spouse is not well enough to instruct a divorce solicitor or to play a part in the proceedings, the family procedure rules allow the court to appoint a person to represent your spouse’s interests. Financial settlements when one spouse has dementia  If you decide to separate, it is important that you get specialist legal advice because, in some financial and pension circumstances, it will be in both of your interests not to get divorced. In other situations, it will be important to get divorced rather than just live apart, so the court can make a binding financial order that may include a pension-sharing order. When contemplating separation or divorce, most people do not want to base their decision solely on financial considerations. However, you do need both expert financial and legal advice to understand the ramifications of staying together or separating, as either option could significantly affect your retirement and personal and financial circumstances. Many people worry about how a dementia diagnosis will affect a financial settlement. The court takes several factors into account when deciding on a fair and reasonable financial settlement. One of those factors is the health of both the husband and wife. A dementia diagnosis means that the court will carefully consider a spouse’s housing, capital and income needs. However, the court will aim to make a financial court order that meets the needs of both husband and wife. Dementia and taking part in divorce and financial court proceedings People also worry about whether a spouse will understand divorce and financial proceedings, and think that they cannot get divorced if their spouse cannot play a part in court proceedings and instruct a solicitor. If a spouse does not have the capacity to instruct a solicitor or make decisions, you can still get divorced and reach a financial settlement. That is because court rules provide for your spouse to be represented in the court proceedings and their interests to be protected. You might also be interested in [related_posts]   How can Evolve Family Law help? The decision to separate or divorce is never easy. It is even harder when a spouse is ill. Divorce solicitors say that it is possible to divorce with dignity after a diagnosis of dementia. In many situations, whilst a spouse cannot cope with sharing a home, they want their spouse to be provided for. The first step is to investigate your options so you can make an informed decision about what is right for you. Contact Evolve Family Law for specialist divorce legal advice.

Pension divorce claims are always tricky because pensions are not the same as other assets: a pension cannot normally be accessed straight away, whereas other assets usually can. Pensions also often come with complicated pension scheme rules. A divorce pension solicitor can help you understand the option of pension offsetting and help you achieve a fair financial settlement. Contact Evolve Family Law for specialist divorce legal advice.   Pension sharing or offsetting There are two main ways to share the value of pensions in divorce financial claims: Pension sharing, or Pension offsetting. With a pension share, you get a share of your spouse’s pension, ranging from 1 to 100% of the pension fund. The shared pension then becomes your pension fund, and any further contributions to the fund after the pension-sharing order is implemented belong to you as the owner of the pension fund. Many spouses don’t want to share their pension because they feel that either they or their employer contributed to the retirement fund, and it is their money. Their spouse may not want to share a pension with a pension sharing order because they want more cash or equity from the family home to buy a new property. Whether you are looking at pension sharing or offsetting, it is vital to get all your pension and your spouse’s pension funds correctly valued before you negotiate a financial settlement.  Comparing pension values Most people receive an annual cash equivalent value of their pension, which shows its value if they want to transfer it to a different pension fund. People assume that two pensions, each with a cash equivalent value (CEV) of £250,000, are of equal value. While the figure may be the same, the two pension funds may produce two very different levels of pension income in retirement. That may be because one fund is an NHS, local government, or defined-benefit scheme, while the other is a personal pension scheme invested in cash or yielding low-risk returns. As you cannot compare the real value of pension funds by comparing CEVs, your divorce solicitor should consider getting advice from a pension actuary to make sure that one CEV is not underplaying the true value of the final salary pension fund or overvaluing a pension fund where the fund is in deficit. The importance of accurately valuing pension funds Spending money getting an asset valued when you may be many years away from retirement may seem wasteful and a daft idea. However, if you both agree to keep your pension funds at their identical CEVs of £250,000, one of you may be able to retire with a pension of £18,000 per year, and the other with £9,000 per year. With most financial court orders, you cannot ask the court to even out pension income injustice when you reach retirement age. That’s why it is so important to accurately value pensions before you reach a financial settlement. Duxbury calculations and pension values for offsetting Instead of using the pension CEV to value a couple's pension funds, the family court can value each fund based on projected future income. This is a more reliable indicator of the pension's true value. Once the income values have been ascertained, the court can undertake a Duxbury calculation. A Duxbury calculation is usually used by the family court when determining the lump sum required to capitalise spousal maintenance payments. This means the amount a financially weaker spouse needs as a capital or lump-sum payment to compensate them for not receiving ongoing monthly spousal maintenance payments. Adopting the same principles and Duxbury methodology, a pension offset amount can be calculated to help reach a financial settlement. You might also be interested in [related_posts]   An example of pension offsetting Here is an example of how pension offsetting can work in solicitor negotiations, family mediation or when a family law judge decides what financial court order to make after the final hearing of a financial remedy application: A husband and wife are both 50 years old. They jointly own a family home with equity of £500,000. The husband has a pension with a CEV of £500,000. The husband's pension is projected to provide £20,000 a year at age 60. The wife has no pension provision. The husband wants to keep his pension, and the wife wants more than 50% of the equity in the house to offset the value of her husband's pension. Without pension offsetting, the wife would be walking away with £250,000 from the house sale proceeds. The wife’s fair share of the projected pension income is £10,000 a year from age 60. A Duxbury calculation says that the capital payment which would produce an income of £10,000 a year from age 60 is £160,000. A discount may be applied for an accelerated payment of the £160,000 because, with a pension sharing order, the wife’s share of her husband's pension would only start to be paid in ten years. Applying a 25% discount reduces £160,000 to £120,000. This results in a pension offset figure of £120,000, and the wife therefore gets £370,000 from the house sale proceeds, and the husband gets around £130,000 from the house and keeps his pension. The order for the sale of the family home and the division of the equity would usually be expressed as percentages to avoid the husband or wife losing out if house prices increase or decrease. Under the figures, the wife would receive 74% of the net proceeds from the sale of the family home, and her husband would receive the balance and keep his pension.   In any contested financial remedy proceedings in which a judge decides how the assets are divided and the extent of any pension offset, there is an element of judicial discretion. For example, some judges may not discount the pension offsetting figure by 25%, and others might decide not to use the Duxbury method. A specialist divorce finance solicitor can advise you on the likely range of pension outcomes in financial proceedings to help you come to an agreed financial settlement through solicitor negotiations, using our One Lawyer Divorce Service or family mediation, and our family lawyers can then assist you in converting your financial agreement into a binding financial consent order. Contact Evolve Family Law for specialist divorce legal advice.+++

It may be possible for you or your former husband or wife to reopen a divorce financial claim if you didn’t obtain a clean break financial court order at the time of your divorce. A recent court decision has highlighted the need for specialist family law advice on whether a delayed court application is appropriate and on the best way to approach your ex-partner. At Evolve Family Law, our divorce settlement lawyers provide expert advice on financial settlements and court orders. Contact Evolve Family Law for specialist divorce and financial settlement advice.   Divorce and financial settlements Some people get divorced but either accidentally or deliberately don’t finalise their financial claims. Here are a few situations where one ex-spouse could either bring a delayed financial claim against their former spouse or reopen a claim: A couple divorced but did not sign a separation agreement and didn’t ask the court to make a financial court order because they did not see the need to do so, as neither owned property nor had much wealth. A couple separated and divorced, but didn’t ask the judge to convert their separation agreement into a binding financial court order because they did not understand the difference between a separation agreement and a court order. A couple went to family mediation and negotiated an agreement. However, they didn’t convert their memorandum of understanding into a court order, as neither considered it necessary to incur the costs of obtaining one. A couple obtained a financial court order at the time of their divorce proceedings, but the financial order left some financial claims open, such as future spousal maintenance claims.   Is there a financial agreement or clean break order? If you are uncertain about whether you have a financial court order or whether your order is a clean break order or not, then it's best to speak to a family law solicitor. The status of a document or the wording in a separation agreement or financial court order can be confusing. That’s why it’s best to get a professional opinion. The need for advice applies if: You are an ex-spouse wondering if you can begin a late financial claim or ask for additional money, or You are a former spouse concerned that you are vulnerable to your ex coming after you for a share of the wealth and assets accumulated after your separation.   The importance of getting specialist family law advice on late financial claims The recent court case of LIN v PAR [2025] EWFC 401 (21 November 2025) has highlighted: It is essential to obtain a financial court order at the time of your divorce, even if your assets are modest, you did not have children together, you signed a prenuptial agreement or were only married for a few years. The importance of how you approach a financially stronger ex-spouse if you want to bring a delayed financial claim. The need to get expert advice to assess if a financial settlement claim is likely to be successful after a substantial delay between the date of the divorce proceedings and the late financial claim. The benefits of trying to negotiate rather than litigate a financial settlement claim. The importance of assessing whether the legal costs in a delayed financial settlement claim will outweigh the value of the potential financial settlement.   You might also be interested in [related_posts]     The court decision in Lin v Par A former wife applied for a financial court order after divorcing her ex-spouse over 20 years earlier. She was able to do this because she and her ex-husband had not obtained a financial court order at the time of their divorce. At the time of their divorce, the couple reached a financial agreement that involved a roughly equal split of their then-modest assets. At the suggestion of a friend and advisor, the ex-wife alleged that her ex-husband failed to provide full financial disclosure, rendering the agreement unfair and invalid. Her ex-husband disputed this. The ex-wife was encouraged to make a delayed financial application as her ex-husband's financial circumstances had changed significantly over the 20 years since their divorce, with the ex-husband said to be worth over 100 million. The ex-wife’s first solicitors asked for a preliminary payment of 10 million and an undertaking not to dispose of assets until her financial claim was resolved. Unsurprisingly, the letter came as a shock to the ex-husband as he had not had contact with his ex-wife for over 12 years. The judge ruled: There had not been any substantial non-disclosure or undue pressure when the couple negotiated the financial agreement at the time of the divorce proceedings. Delay in bringing a financial claim and the extent of the delay are relevant factors when the court assesses the fairness of making an order. A hostile first letter can set the tone for the future negotiation and the decision to commence a financial remedy application. One spouse's substantial wealth compared to their former partner’s finances does not justify the court making an order in favour of a financially weaker ex-spouse. An ex-spouse is not responsible for meeting the ongoing and future needs of their former husband or wife when their needs were not relationship-generated.   The court made no financial award in favour of the ex-wife, holding that the husband's £100m business and other assets were generated after the couple had reached a financial agreement and shared their assets. However, to secure that court ruling, the ex-husband spent nearly £1.8m on his legal fees and in contributing towards his former wife's legal expenses. Every family court decision is made on the facts. Therefore, in other circumstances, a judge may have been persuaded to make a financial court order in favour of the ex-wife. That risk can be avoided by securing a clean break order at the time of the divorce proceedings or by subsequently negotiating an order.   Reopening a financial claim after a divorce The decision in Lin v Par should not deter ex-spouses from seeking advice on reopening a financial claim after a divorce, but you should take specialist advice on the best way to do so and the likelihood of a successful negotiation or court claim. At Evolve Family Law, our divorce settlement lawyers pride themselves on offering commercial, pragmatic legal advice tailored to your situation. The fact that you have the right to bring a claim does not necessarily mean you should do so. Equally, ignoring the risk of an ex-spouse resurfacing and asking for millions is something that your family law solicitors can help resolve by negotiating a clean break to give you financial certainty and security. A conversation about your old financial agreement or court order does not commit you to reopening a financial claim, but it will give you an indication of what you could do so you can make informed choices. Contact Evolve Family Law for expert divorce and financial settlement advice.

According to the latest research, women face a bigger income drop than men in the year after their divorce. Our family law solicitors look at the latest research and explain how the structure of a financial settlement and childcare arrangements can affect your post-divorce income.   Contact Evolve Family Law for Specialist Family Law Advice.   Research into the impact of divorce on incomes The latest research from Legal & General reveals that on average, women see their income fall by 50% in the year following their divorce.  In contrast, men’s incomes fall by 30% in the year following the divorce. L&G refer to this as the divorce gap. The L&G research goes deeper and reveals that: Nearly a quarter of women (24%) felt financially vulnerable after their divorce. Nearly a fifth (19%) of women struggled to pay their bills. 13% of women are concerned about the financial implications of retiring alone. How about the men? Only 16% of men felt financially vulnerable, and only 10% of men struggled to pay essential bills. 8% of men were more concerned about their retirement plans and retiring alone after their divorce. Some people may think the L&G research shows that women worry more about finances than men, but the data goes beyond the headlines and explains the rationale behind the divorce gap.   Research into the reasons for the divorce gap The L&G research revealed the reasons for the divorce gap as: 63% of women felt the financial impact of stopping sharing finances and outgoings with a partner, compared to only 39% of men. Roughly a quarter of the people surveyed said that the wife was the primary breadwinner before the divorce, and in 22% of marriages, the husband and wife earned about the same amount. After their divorce, around a fifth of women returned to employment.  Women are twice as likely as men to reduce their hours of work after their divorce because of parenting responsibilities. Only 13% of divorcing couples considered pension splitting when reaching a financial settlement. Women tend to prioritise non-pension assets when reaching a financial settlement. 28% of women did not receive pensions as part of their divorce settlement compared to 17% of men.   You might also be interested in [related_posts]   Will a divorce have an impact on my income? When a couple separates, it is common to move from a two-income household to a one-income household, resulting in a reduction in income. Unfortunately, it is often not possible to achieve a corresponding decrease in outgoings across the two households created by the separation. It is crucial that your divorce solicitor looks carefully at the impact of divorce on your income, as that should massively influence the size and structure of the financial settlement. Reaching a divorce settlement is a bit like putting a jigsaw together because the capital settlement (the share of the family home sale proceeds or the split of savings and investments) can influence how much income you need to meet your outgoings or your ability to pay spousal maintenance. For example, if you receive sufficient equity from the sale of the family home, you may be able to buy a new property either mortgage-free or with a modest mortgage. If you are the financially stronger spouse and receive a reduced share of the equity in the family home, you may not be able to afford to pay spousal maintenance and pay your bills.   Income support after a divorce If a divorce will impact your income, then you can consider ways to enhance your income through: Spousal maintenance. Child support. Improving your earnings capacity through increasing your hours of employment or retraining.   Income issues after divorce There can be income issues after divorce because with all three options, problems can arise, such as: The court prefers to achieve a clean break with no spousal maintenance payable in cases where a clean break is appropriate and there is sufficient capital to achieve that type of financial court order. Spousal maintenance stops if you remarry and may end if you cohabit with a new partner or if your former spouse loses their job or their income decreases. A former spouse may not comply with a spousal maintenance order, so you may be forced to apply to the court to enforce the order. Child support is not payable if parents agree or the court orders equal shared parenting under a child arrangement order. This rule applies even if your former spouse earns substantially more than you. You may agree on a financial settlement based on shared parenting, but your ex-partner then says they cannot share care, leaving you with additional childcare responsibilities. It may not be possible to increase your earnings capacity if you are undertaking the lion's share of parenting or if you were out of the job market as a stay-at-home parent during the marriage.   Assessing if you will receive or be ordered to pay spousal maintenance Whether the court will order that you pay spousal maintenance or receive it depends on a range of factors. These include: Whether you have young children to support, and whether the care of the children impacts your earnings capacity. Whether any disability or age impacts your ability to seek employment or increase your income, or your ex-spouse’s ability to do so. Your income and earnings capacity, and those of your former spouse. The extent of your respective reasonable outgoings. The length of the marriage. Other factors, such as the existence of a prenuptial agreement that sets out whether and how long spousal maintenance should be payable after your divorce. Depending on the ages of the children and future earnings capacity, the court may order that a former spouse should pay spousal maintenance on a time-limited basis so that you can adjust to the divorce and reduction in household income. Alternatively, the court may prefer to award you more capital so you can buy a home with an affordable mortgage (compared to your ex’s financial settlement), meaning that you have lower monthly outgoings than your former spouse and therefore no requirement for spousal maintenance.   Talk to a family lawyer   Whatever your priorities, it is best on separation or divorce to take legal advice from a specialist divorce solicitor so you can understand the range of options for your financial settlement and work out which one is best for you and your family.   Contact Evolve Family Law for Specialist Family Law Advice.