Since Radmacher v Granatino made prenuptial agreements legally enforceable in the UK, it has been evident that the extent of financial disclosure is pertinent to how they are weighted in the courts.
In an article for Family Law, Vardags barrister John Oxley argues that the court´s weighting of prenuptial agreements in ancillary relief cases in the light of non-disclosure was radically altered by the Sharland and Gohil cases.
In ‘For no falsehood can endure: disclosure and prenuptial agreements after Sharland and Gohil’, John puts forth that the cases reversed the burden of demonstrating materiality of non-disclosure and stressed that the duty of disclosure is owed to the court, not the other party. In a survey of case law beginning with K v K , John explores the changing consensuses and probes the issues involved in the unclear precise legal status of the prenup and the complexities of the duty of disclosure between parties.
You can read the article in the November issue of Family Law.