L3 Family Law : Radmacher v Granatino (Appellant) [2010] (Booklet, p. 72-74)

Radmacher (Respondent) v Granatino (Appellant) [2010]

Questions 2 and 3:

The specificity of  this marriage is that the spouses are neither English citizens nor of the same nationality. In addition to this, although a pre-nuptial agreement had been entered into in Germany, the marriage was celebrated in Oxford, hence the petition for divorce being filed in England.

Summary:

The facts concern the breakdown of a marriage between a German lady (whose maiden name is Radmacher) and a French banker (called Granatino) in London in 1998.

Probably on account of the fact that the amount of money at stake was quite substantial (but also because the case involved a mixed couple and finally because the situation was that of a defended divorce) the case was heard at first instance by the High Court.

Given that the petitioner had not taken legal advice before signing the pre-nuptial agreement and that he had then left banking to take up his studies in Oxford at the time of the divorce, the High Court judge chose to modify the terms of the pre-nuptial agreement entered into by the parties, granting the petitioner (Granatino) enough money to purchase a house in addition to a comfortable annual income.

Mrs Radmacher then appealed the High Court decision to the Court of Appeal, which reversed the trial court decision and held that the pre-nuptial agreement, although entered into in Germany, should have been given full weight.

(Grammar: To appeal a court decision to a higher court / To hold, held, held)

In turn, Mr Granatino appealed the Court of Appeal’s decision but his appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court, (which upheld the Court of Appeal’s finding).

Lady Hale: Dissents with the majority opinion on 2 grounds:

A. Definition of marriage:

Lady Hale contends that marriage is both a contract and a status, meaning that the parties are not entirely free to determine the full terms of the contract, but that these terms are instead determined by the law of the land. She also considers that modern forms of marriage give the parties a lot of leeway but do not allow them to neglect their fundamental duty to support each other and their children.

(Vocabulary: leeway (n.) = latitude, flexibility)

B. A gender issue:

1. The object of a pre-nuptial agreement being for one or both parties to protect his or her assets, one may agree with Lady Hale that the idea of the agreement would be to deny the weaker spouse 50% of the couple’s assets in case of divorce. This argument is debatable as more and more people now have careers but it appears that there is a gender issue because – although this is not the case in Radmacher v Gratanino – pre-nuptial agreements tend to benefit the rich which statistically tend to be male. 

Vocabulary: debatable = questionable, disputable

Grammar: "Adjectifs substantivés": the rich, the poor, the unemployed (...) 

On the same topic, see the following article from The Guardian : Prenup Agreement enforced under UK Law