This year marks the 15th anniversary of one of the most important family law judgements in living memory.

In October 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that Nicolas Granatino, a former investment banker, should be held to the terms of a pre-nuptial agreement which he had signed months before his marriage to a German heiress, Katrin Radmacher.

When they divorced after eight years together, he argued that he should not be held to the terms of the document, under which he would not be entitled to spousal maintenance in the event that their relationship foundered.

However, the Supreme Court decided that sufficient weight should, in fact, be given to the pre-nup (https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2009-0031), reiterating the outcome of an earlier Court of Appeal hearing.

It was a landmark moment but its impact was not felt immediately.

There remained a lingering sense among some husbands and brides-to-be that nuptial agreements – both pre- and post-nups – were only really relevant for the wealthy.

Over time, though, an increasing number of people of rather more modest financial means than Mr Granatino and Ms Radmacher have come to realise how immensely practical nuptial agreements are.

In my experience, that is particularly true when it comes to avoiding the potential for dispute when marriages fail.

Whilst some might regard that statement in itself as a sign of how unromantic the concept of a pre-nup is, it is worth bearing in mind the latest figures published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) which show that 42 per cent of married couples have parted divorced before celebrating their silver wedding anniversaries (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/divorce/bulletins/divorcesinenglandandwales/2023).

According to the Ministry of Justice, divorces now take more than 16 months on average to conclude, due in part to spouses’ differences of opinion about how best to divide their assets (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-april-to-june-2025/family-court-statistics-quarterly-april-to-june-2025).

Similar to the ‘just in case’ nature of an insurance policy, a pre-nup provides the basis for a division, thereby avoiding the prospect of leaving such calculations solely at the discretion of a family judge and after a considerable wait for a hearing in the busy court schedules.

I and my colleagues at Hall Brown are very well aware of how many more people of all ages and backgrounds now regard pre-nups as a routine part of preparation for a marriage.

That pattern has been reflected in a new survey of 2,000 people by the Marriage Foundation, which found that one-fifth of married couples have a pre-nup in place (https://marriagefoundation.org.uk/research/one-in-five-weddings-begin-with-a-prenup/).

The research also discovered that roughly half of those people questioned who were unmarried, whether in a relationship or not, “might” want a pre-nup before tying the knot.

I’ve been telling Sanchez Manning, the Times’ Social Affairs Correspondent, that the general appreciation of how uncertain married life can be is just one of the factors behind the growing popularity of pre-nups.

Arguably the most significant reason is parents gifting money to children either as an early inheritance or to help them onto the property ladder and then wanting to protect those sums from the risk of divorce.

The value which many couples now put on pre-nups is not lost on those who advise about changes in the law.

That is important because although the Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of Katrin Radmacher was an important piece of case law, it did not give nuptial agreements full legal weight.

As a result, the Law Commission recommended in 2014 that the introduction of “qualifying nuptial agreements, enforceable contracts, which would enable couples to make binding arrangements for the financial consequences of divorce or dissolution” (https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/matrimonial-property-needs-and-agreements/).

Although the then coalition government gave a positive response, plans to advance the proposals ran out of parliamentary road thanks to a General Election the following year.

Fast-forward several years and the Law Commission was asked to produce a ‘scoping report’ on possible changes to the law governing financial remedy on divorce.

The report, which was published in December last year, was intended as an essential second phase of reform, following the passing of the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/11/contents) that simplified the process by which the orders ending a marriage are granted.

Once again, the Law Commission not only identified room for reform but a role which might be played by nuptial agreements in improving how separating couples attend to their finances (https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/financial-remedies-on-divorce/).

Ministers are still to give a full response to the report. Yet, even in the absence of legislation, the Marriage Foundation study underlines how people are becoming increasingly aware of how important pre-nups are in applying common sense and clarity to the very emotional business of breaking up.