Legal Case Summary
Granatino v Radmacher  UKSC 42
Validity of anti-nuptial agreement providing neither party should benefit from the other’s property
A French investment banker married a very wealthy German national. Prior to the marriage, at the request of the wife’s family, an anti-nuptial agreement was signed by both parties. The agreement provided that each party forego any interest or benefit from the other’s property acquired either before or during the marriage. They had two children but divorced after nine years and the husband claimed ancillary relief against the wife’s assets.
The husband contended he should not be bound by the terms of the agreement because he was nowhere near as wealthy as the wife, and he had not sought independent legal advice. He argued anti-nuptial agreements are contrary to public policy under MacLeod v MacLeod  1 AC 298 because the financially weaker party is inevitably under pressure to sign, they exclude the jurisdiction of the court which is unfair, and if they are to be accorded validity, it should be a matter for parliament to legislate to provide for their validity. The wife argued there was no legislation prohibiting such agreements, and parties should be free to agree between themselves how their assets are to be held. The husband entered the agreement of his own free will and should be bound by its terms.
Decision / Outcome
The anti-nuptial agreement was valid. The rule that such agreements are contrary to public policy should no longer apply. A court could give effect to an agreement even if the result is different to that which the court would have ordered. If freely entered into, with all information available to both parties and in the absence of pressure, such agreements should be upheld, unless it would be unfair to do so.
Join UOL LLB Crash Course online along with Solved Pastpapers, click here for more information
Answering problem questions in the University of London LLB programme requires a clear understanding of legal principles, good analytical skills and the ability to apply the law to a given set of facts. Here are some tips to help you answer problem questions effectively:
- Read the question carefully: Make sure you understand what the question is asking before you begin writing.
- Identify the legal issues: Identify the legal issues raised by the facts and the relevant laws that apply to those issues.
- Analyze the facts: Analyze the facts presented in the question, focusing on the details that are relevant to the legal issues.
- Apply the law: Apply the relevant laws to the facts, making sure to consider all relevant legal principles and cases.
- Structure your answer: Use a clear and well-structured approach, starting with an introduction that outlines the main legal issues, followed by a discussion of the relevant laws and a conclusion that summarizes your analysis and sets out your conclusion.
- Use relevant cases and statutes: Cite relevant cases and statutes to support your analysis and help illustrate the legal principles you are discussing.
- Be concise: Be concise and to the point, focusing on the key issues and avoiding unnecessary detail.
- Proofread: Proofread your answer carefully to make sure it is error-free and clear.
- Time management: Make sure you manage your time effectively, leaving enough time to review your answer and make any necessary corrections.
By following these tips, you should be able to answer problem questions in the University of London LLB programme effectively and with confidence. Good luck!