TOP 100 ENGLAND SITES
| |||
|
| |||
| |||
|
| |||
| The 'hidden hunger' in British families Food parcels are associated with famine-struck parts of the world. But one British charity has seen a surge in demand for its emergency supply boxes. bbc.co.uk |
7/7 inquests: bombers made dummy run before attacks The July 7 bombers made a four-hour dummy run to London nine days before their attacks in which they visited a number of different targets, the inquest into their victims has heard. telegraph.co.uk |
Prenup agreement enforced Supreme court test case finds prenuptial agreement between German heiress and former husband to be legally bindingPrenuptial agreements have been recognised as enforceable under British divorce law for the first time, in a supreme court ruling today.Judges found in favour of the 40-year-old German heiress Katrin Radmacher, who had sought to protect her £106m fortune in the eventuality of a marriage breakdown.Radmacher and her French ex-husband, Nicolas Granatino, 38, a former investment banker, had signed a prenuptial agreement before their wedding in London in 1998. The agreement stipulated that neither party would benefit financially if the marriage ended.By ruling that such contracts are legally binding, the supreme court has altered the landscape of divorce settlements. It is likely to be a severe blow to the UK's reputation as the "divorce capital of Europe".By a majority of eight to one, the supreme court justices dismissed Granatino's appeal, saying that after their ruling "it will be natural to infer that parties entering into agreements will intend that effect be given to them".The judges agreed that in the right case a prenuptial agreement could have decisive or compelling weight. Lord Phillips, the president of the supreme court, said the courts would still have the discretion to waive any pre- or postnuptial agreement, especially when it was unfair to any children of the marriage.Some lawyers claimed that the landmark decision represented a constitutional upset in which judges had started making rather than interpreting the law.Granatino had given up his six-figure investment banker's job to become a £30,000-a-year biotechnology researcher at Oxford University in 2003, the year the marriage began to deteriorate.When the couple divorced in 2006, Granatino claimed that at the time they married he had had no idea of his wife's wealth and had not received proper legal advice, or had the German prenuptial agreement translated for him before he signed.Despite regular visits to Radmacher's Chelsea flat, her family's Swiss ski chalet in Verbier and the family home, her wealth was not "particularly evident", said Granatino, adding that the latter property had "shared bathrooms and no great art".He was awarded £5.85m by a high court judge in 2008, but this was cut a year later on appeal to a lump sum of £1m in lieu of maintenance, with a £2.5m fund for a house to be returned to Radmacher when the youngest of the couple's two daughters, now seven, reaches the age of 22. Radmacher had earlier agreed to pay off his debts of £700,000.Radmacher, who was at the supreme court for the ruling, said afterwards: "I am really pleased with the ruling but saddened at the four-year process that brought us to this point. I am delighted that Britain has upheld fairness. It is important to me that no one else should have to go through this."An heiress to a German paper company, Radmacher was reputed to be one of the richest women in Europe in 2007.In a statement, Radmacher added: "For Nicolas and I, in our homelands – France and Germany – these agreements are entirely normal and routine. We made a promise to each other that if anything went wrong between us, both of us would walk away without making financial claims on each other. The promise made to me was broken."I know some people think of prenuptial agreements as being unromantic, but for us it was meant to be a way of proving you are marrying only for love. It was a natural part of the marriage process. In my case, my father insisted upon it to protect my inheritance."The case will set a significant legal precedent.Brenda Long, of the law firm Blandy & Blandy, said: "This supreme court ruling means the judiciary has overstepped its prescribed role of interpreting law and actually created law instead. This is particularly surprising given that one of the judges, Baroness Hale, has previously expressed the view that development in this area should be dealt with by legislative reform rather than judicial development and gave a dissenting opinion in today's judgment."This decision could introduce an inherent degree of sex discrimination within the family court system as prenuptial agreements predominantly benefit the rich and it is more commonly the woman in the marriage who is the financially weaker party."Radmacher divorce casePrenupsDivorceDivorceFamily financesOwen Bowcottguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Sport pitch rabbits may be gassed Thousands of rabbits could be culled after being blamed for damaging a town's sports pitches. bbc.co.uk |
Video: Christmas comes early at Dream Toys Libby Wernham, 11, heads to the Dream Toys fair in London to find out what Santa will be bringing this ChristmasRichard Sprenger guardian.co.uk |