Trusts and divorce

Trusts and divorce

If a party to a marriage/civil partnership is a beneficiary under a trust and entitled to receive income or capital from it, that income or capital may be regarded as a financial resource of that party and be taken into account by the court. The court's approach will depend on the type of trust in question and the reasons for which it was set up. The court's ability to consider trusts assets as a resource of a party arises from the section 25(2)(a) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) and Schedule 5, Part 5 to the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004). A trust may also be varied if it is a nuptial settlement. In addition, there may be trusts or property law considerations within family proceedings.

There are three main methods of approaching trusts on divorce/dissolution:

•
treating trust assets as a resource available to one of the parties and thus available for distribution by the court—see Practice Note: Introduction to trusts within financial proceedings—Trusts as a financial resource
•
variation of nuptial settlements under MCA 1973, s 24(1)(c)

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Private Client News

Private Client weekly highlights—21 November 2024

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) Wigglesworth v Beetson, in which the claimant failed in an action for estoppel and adverse possession; (2) the Hansard Society to host a briefing on parliamentary process for Assisted Dying Bill; (3) Khan v Khan, which considered family property and constructive trusts; (4) analysis of the Autumn Budget announcement to bring unused pension funds and death benefits within the scope of IHT; (5) Palmer v Sans, which found that there was no transaction at an undervalue where property was already held on trust for the transferee; (6) KA v FA (The Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening), where the court recognised an overseas adoption notwithstanding failure of common law test; and (7) Kireeva v Bedzhamov, in which the Supreme Court has confirmed the application of the immovables rule to English property.

HoL committee issues call for evidence on Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill

A Special Public Bill Committee established by the House of Lords has issued a call for evidence on the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill. The deadline for submissions is Friday 20 December 2024.

Privy Council rules BVI company shares are not immovable property (Al Thani v Al Thani)

Private Client analysis: In a decision which will come as a relief to private individuals who own shares in BVI companies, the Privy Council has decided that section 245 of the BVI’s Business Companies Act 2004 does not have the effect of re-categorising shares as immovable property for the purposes of succession. Written by Kyle Bonnell, pupil at XXIV Old Buildings.

Supreme Court confirms application of immovables rule to English property

The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed Ms Kireeva’s (Russian bankruptcy trustee’s) appeal to overturn the Court of Appeal’s’ decision regarding matters arising out of the bankruptcy of Mr Bedzhamov. Peter Declercq and Patrick Elliot, partners at DCQ Legal (who acted for Ms Kireeva), discuss the implications of the judgment.