The case between Radmacher and Granatinowhere German national, Radmacher, and a French citizen, Granatinocame together. They were both affluent and very educated. While Ms. Radmachercame from a family with an affluent background, Mr. Granationo was employed by an investment, the higher ranking bank. From the personal benefits and gains that Ms. Radmacher. After separation, the couple was engaged in court battles that ended in the Supreme Court. This paper looks at the impact and importance of the decision that was held by the court of appeal.

Facts and Court Rulings/Decisions

By the time the couple separated in the year 2006 (Family Law Week, n.d), the husband had long stopped working as a banker. The couple had two children by then. Upon separation, Mr. Granationo took the case to the high court and was granted a financial relief amounting to 5.5 pounds, enabling him to buy a home at the very heart of London. Although the high court judge reduced the weight she attached to the case, she considered the circumstances of the agreement was made, and granted Mr. Granatino the financial relief. However, the wife appealed, and the court of appeal ruled out that Mr. Granatino should only be awarded provision as a father of the two. The award should not care for his long-term needs in life. When Mr. Granatino appealed to the supreme court, the appellate ruling was dismissed. The supreme court ruled that the court paid no regard to the ante-nuptial agreements (Family Law Week, n.d). The an indication that the courts ay be willing to reconsider pre-nuptial agreements as binding. By considering the circumstances of the agreement while making a ruling, the court of appeal judges sent a signal that, a pre-nuptial agreement can be binding, especially when the parts that do not contravene family law are applied. After a thorough, independent analysis of the court of appeal decision, this paper argues that the ruling of the court of appeal showed that pre-nuptial agreements can be as binding as post-nuptial agreements.

Analysis of the Decision by the Court of Appeal

The decision of the court of appeal added decisive weight to the pre-nuptial agreement, observing that no party,English law, unlike the German law, does not recognize a pre-nuptial agreement (Harris & Spicer, 2008). The decision by the court of appeal thus pointed that the English courts may start honouring the pre-nuptial agreements. Harris and Spicer (2008)foreignness of the parties. Also, according to the Matrimonial causes act of 1973, children are a big consideration in judging the weight, and the importance that should be attached to a pre-nuptial agreement.

In regard to considerations made when giving a decision in pre-nuptial agreements, Harding (2013,P. 256) asserts that a court can only give weight to a prenuptial agreement only when it is considered fair to do so.

Going by the decision of the court, one can, therefore, argue that the case of Radmacher V Granatino provides a platform for the recognition of prenuptial agreements in the UK. However, the right circumstances of the agreement have to be considered, for example, if the children were factored in the agreement, whether each of the parties agrees to the terms, and whether a qualified person as involved in the writing of the agreement. Since the decision in the Radmachr V Granatino

An implication of honoring pre-nuptial agreementsinMM & M, n. d) observes that the legal certainty can be undermined by the concept of fairness, because what may be fair or just in a case may not be just or fair in another. Reduced litigation costs come as another advantage of pre-nuptial agreements. Since the agreement is binding, there may not be a need to litigate much. The effect of this is the reduction of costs that would have been used in litigation.

The decision the court made in the case of Radmacher and Granation also has the implication of personal autonomy. If prenuptial agreements were honored as happened in this case, then one would be sure of how their property ought to be shared in the case of divorce. The honoring of the agreement thus brings with it the promotion of the marriage institution, since marriage offers a better legal position compared to cohabitation. Honouring pre-nuptial agreements would also place the UK in a better position; that is in line with other nations, in terms of pre-nuptial agreements (Kentridge, 2010). For example, in the UK and many European countries, including Germany and France, prenuptial agreements are binding. Harris and Spicer (2008) observe that, if the UK can start honoring pre-nuptial agreements, this would go r in reducing the problems that couples experience, like seeking to enforce a pre-nuptial agreement in the UK, as it was the case with Radmacher V Granatino.

shows that the UK has not made a consistent position in regard to pre-nuptial agreements. Although the decision of the court served to promote the institution of marriage, this will not be consistent if a law is not enacted into that effect (Kentridge, 2010). In addition, the decision causes some doubts, since the only family specialist in the Supreme’s court decision was Lord Baroness Hale, who went against the decision of the majority.

Conclusion

In sum, the court’s decision in Radmacher V Granatinosets a precedent that the UK may start honoring prenuptial agreements in the near future. The decision had the implications of making pre-nuptial agreements binding in the UK. This would come with some advantages as legal certainty, personal autonomy, and, in addition, reducing the problems that partners go through in the event of a divorce. However, the lack of unanimity in the rulings

REFERENCES

Family Law Week.n. d. Radmacher (formerly Granatino) V. Granatino [2010], UKSC, 42. Retrieved online from http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed68495

Harding, M. 2013.Conflict of laws. Oxon, OX: Roultledge Publishing.

Harris, I., & Spicer, R. 2008. Prenuptial agreements: A practical guide. London, UK: Hammicks Legal.

Matrimonial Causes Act.1973, Ch. 18. London, UK: The Stationary Office.

M M& M. n. d. Summary of the current law: Pre-nuptial agreements. Retrieved online from http://www.prenups.uk.com/site/summary-of-the-current-law

Kentridge, J. 2010. Case preview: Radmacher (formerly Granatino) V. Granatino. UKSC, retrieved online from http://ukscblog.com/