On 5 June 2026, the government launched its consultation “A fairer end to relationships”, inviting interested parties to comment on proposed areas of reform of family law in England and Wales. Among the proposals is a long-awaited change to the status of nuptial agreements: the introduction of “Qualifying Nuptial Agreements” (QNAs), which would be legally binding. Nuptial agreements would shift from being influential to enforceable. In this article, we consider the proposal, the safeguards that would apply and what the change could mean for couples.

What is the law now?

In England and Wales, nuptial agreements can carry significant weight, but they are still not legally binding. The court still has the final say on what is ‘fair’.

On divorce, the court’s powers stem from section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. This requires the court to have regard to all circumstances of the case, including the welfare of any children and the parties’ finances, earning capacity and overall circumstances. Nuptial agreements are not expressly included within this provision, but they fall within the court’s duty to consider “all circumstances of the case” under section 25(1) and/or constituting “conduct” that would be “inequitable to disregard” under section 25(2)(g).

While nuptial agreements are not automatically enforceable, they can have a substantial impact on a judge’s decision. In 2010, the Supreme Court in Radmacher v Granatino transformed the weight given to nuptial agreements. The Supreme Court concluded that the family court should give effect to nuptial agreements freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation of its implications, unless it would be unfair to do so.

The key question for the court when considering nuptial agreements is whether the agreement meets both parties’ needs. If needs are not met, the agreement is likely to carry little, if any, weight. The court is also unlikely to uphold a nuptial agreement if it fails to make appropriate provision for children.

What is the government proposing by way of reform?

The aim of creating enforceable nuptial agreements – QNAs – is to give couples greater certainty and autonomy, while reducing conflict on relationship breakdown. As couples will have more control over how their finances will be dealt with upon divorce, the Government also proposes to build in existing, well-recognised safeguards to make sure any agreement is entered freely and with a proper understanding of its implications.

Any QNA would therefore need to meet the following set of safeguards (as first proposed by the Law Commission in 2014 and which many practitioners already have in mind):

• It must be a valid contract, free from undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation
• Both parties must sign a statement confirming they understand the agreement is a QNA and that it limits the court’s discretion when making financial orders
• It must not be made within 28 days of the marriage or civil partnership
• Each party must receive disclosure of material information about the other’s financial situation
• Each party must understand the legal effect and consequences of the agreement by obtaining independent legal advice before signing such agreement (not specified how this would be evidenced but perhaps, as now, with advising lawyers signing a certificate)

Even if the above safeguards are in place, the Government is clear that any reform must make sure that the parties’ needs are still met. The court will continue to protect parties from real hardship, but where a QNA is challenged on the basis of needs, the test will be narrower than in the absence of a QNA. It will remain important to consider carefully the parties’ needs (both current and anticipated) when drafting the agreement to avoid exposing the QNA to further scrutiny in the future.

In reality, the government’s proposals reflect the position many family lawyers say the courts are already taking.

Partner Richard Hogwood, who strongly advocates reforming the law surrounding nuptial agreements, says:

“I welcome reform that has the effect of making nuptial agreements legally binding. In practice, we are very nearly there anyway. Following the landmark case of Radmacher v Granatino, we already have the key guidance and necessary safeguards in place. Any new legislation would simply build on that, providing greater certainty and bringing us into line with many of our neighbouring jurisdictions. As such, now seems like a timely opportunity for the Government to ‘codify’ our existing case law on nuptial agreements, as well as taking into account the recommendations in the 2014 Law Commission report, so that couples can plan with confidence.”

If adopted, the reforms would mark a significant shift in the legal status of nuptial agreements, giving couples greater control over their financial arrangements in the event of divorce.