Making Claims & Financial Settlements After Divorce.

No. Getting divorced ends your marriage, but it does not sever the financial ties you have with your former partner. In addition to getting your decree absolute, you also need a court to approve a legally binding financial settlement with your former partner called a Consent Order. If you don’t, it is possible that they may have a claim against you at any point in the future. To completely sever your financial ties with your former partner, you need to secure a Clean Break Order.

A Clean Break Order stipulates that the Consent Order ends any on-going financial relationship between you and your former partner. In circumstances where the division of assets and debts is relatively straightforward, needs can be met and there is no uncertainty about the future financial situation of either party, we would usually advise a Clean Break Order is sought, as it provides certainty and closure.

This may not be possible in all cases, as there may need to be an on-going financial relationship between you and your former partner (to support one party’s income needs for example). There may be uncertainty about either party’s employment situation, or the outcome of a property or business sale, which may mean that you want to delay finalising the formal end of your financial relationship. In such cases, it is important to be as clear as possible about which elements of your financial relationship remain intact and how the relationship will ultimately be severed. It is possible to agree to a deferred Clean Break Order, which will come into force once specified conditions have been satisfied (the sale of property, for example).

Reasons why people choose to bring a claim against a former partner obviously depend on the individual circumstances, but they can include:

• Not having resolved financial issues at the time of the separation or divorce/dissolution of Civil Partnership – and realising the need to do so subsequently.
• Subsequent events which change the financial circumstances of either party. Such events must cause a significant or “material” change to one party’s financial circumstances. This could be due to one party earning or inheriting a large sum post-divorce, which the other feels they are entitled to a share of.
• One party deciding that the original settlement was unfair – this could be due to the intentional, or unintentional, non-disclosure of relevant facts (such as a promotion or job offer) or undervaluation of an asset which has a significant impact on the agreement.
• One party believing that they were pressured into the original settlement.

There is no time limit on claims made post-divorce. If a party’s financial claims have not been dismissed by order of the court, so long as that party has not remarried, it is open to either party to make a claim at any point in the future. The court will fully consider all the individual circumstances of any claim, no matter the length of time since separation, so it is vital to safeguard yourself from any future claims if you can. We will support you in finalising the most appropriate outcome possible, to minimise the risk of any post-divorce claims.

An example: Vince vs Wyatt

Vince’s first wife claimed against him over 20 years after their divorce, following the success of a wind turbine business Vince had established following their separation. This business had made Vince extremely wealthy, far more than either party could have foreseen when they separated. At the time, the modest financial circumstances of both parties led to them not finalising their financial settlement, which meant that Vince’s former wife’s claim was successful.

Vince argued that the marriage had ended too long ago for the claim to be valid, and that his former wife was not entitled to a share in his new wealth as it was earned long after their separation. The court disagreed, with Lord Wilson of the Supreme Court emphasising “the potentially life-long obligations which attend a marriage”.

Cases such as this highlight the need for a formal financial settlement, no matter what your current financial circumstances.

If you remarry before making a claim against your former partner, you may not be able to do so following your remarriage. As always, your individual circumstances will be relevant to whether a claim can be made. If you intend to remarry before your financial settlement from your previous relationship has been finalised, it is advisable to get legal advice about protecting your position.

The most important thing is to formally indicate your intention to pursue a financial claim before you remarry, either by issuing your financial application or by indicating that you intend to do so on the Divorce Petition.

This restriction on making a claim only works one way: only the party who remarries is unable to make a claim. As such, if your former partner remarries, but you do not, it remains open to you to make a claim against them.

If you are intending to remarry before your financial settlement from a previous relationship is resolved, speak to us so we can provide the best advice about securing your position.

It is relatively common for people to fail to make provision for their retirement, so pensions are often a source of post-divorce claims, particularly in relation to contributions made to one partner’s pension pot post-separation. Usually, the court will order that only pension contributions made during the relationship are relevant, but that is not always the case. For more information about pensions on separation, see our guide to Pensions on Divorce.

Yes, it is possible for your ex-spouse to make a claim against assets you acquired after your divorce, but only if your financial relationship was never formally severed by a court order.

Many people assume that once the decree absolute is granted, all financial ties come to an end. In reality, unless you obtained a legally binding Consent Order or Clean Break Order, your ex may still have the right to claim a share of property, business assets, pensions, or inheritance you have acquired since the divorce.

This risk has been highlighted by several well-known legal cases, including those where individuals became significantly wealthier in the years following separation. In those instances, the absence of a formal financial settlement left the door open to future claims, sometimes decades later.

If you’ve built assets since your divorce and are unsure whether your finances were properly settled, it’s important to act. We can review your circumstances and, if appropriate, help you secure the necessary legal protection to close the door on future claims.

Yes, in many cases it is possible to defend a financial claim made long after your divorce. Your ability to do so will depend on whether a financial order was previously made and the specific circumstances of the claim.

If no Consent Order or Clean Break Order was issued at the time of your divorce, your ex-spouse may still have the legal right to bring a claim, even years later. However, that doesn’t mean the court will automatically grant them a share of your assets. The court will consider a wide range of factors, including:

• The length of time since the divorce
• Whether any informal agreements were made
• Each party’s current financial situation
• Contributions made during the marriage
• The needs of any children

In some cases, especially where a long period has passed or where the claim appears opportunistic, it may be possible to challenge or limit the claim. We will assess the strength of the application, gather any supporting evidence (such as prior agreements or asset valuations), and advise you on the best approach to protect your financial position.

If you’ve been served with a claim or suspect one may be coming, it’s important to seek legal advice promptly. Early intervention can improve your chances of resolving matters efficiently and on favourable terms.

If you believe your ex-spouse failed to disclose assets or income at the time of your divorce settlement, you may be able to challenge the agreement and bring a new financial claim.

Financial settlements rely on both parties providing full and honest disclosure of their financial position. If a settlement was reached based on incomplete or misleading information, the court may consider setting aside the original agreement, particularly if the hidden asset would have materially changed the outcome.

Examples of non-disclosure can include:

• Undisclosed bank accounts or investments
• Property or business interests not declared
• Future income or bonuses that were known but not revealed
• Undervaluation of significant assets

If proven, non-disclosure undermines the integrity of the original agreement and can lead to a revised settlement that better reflects your entitlement.

Uncovering these details can be complex, especially years after the divorce, but it is not uncommon. If you suspect you were misled during the original process, we’re here to listen and advise you on whether your case may justify reopening the settlement.

If you’ve been contacted by your former spouse about a financial claim, whether through a solicitor or the court, it’s important not to ignore it. Even if you believe the matter was resolved years ago, the absence of a court-approved order means a claim may still be legally valid.

Here’s what to do:

1. Do not respond directly or make any admissions until you’ve spoken to a solicitor.
2. Locate any documents from your divorce that relate to financial discussions or agreements.
3. Act quickly. There are procedural deadlines to be aware of once formal proceedings begin.

At Lanyon Bowdler, we regularly support clients in defending post-divorce financial claims, including those brought many years after separation. We’ll review the strength of the claim, explain your legal position clearly, and work to protect your financial interests with discretion and expertise. We’re here to help you move forward with confidence and peace of mind.

The legal costs involved in resolving a post-divorce financial claim can vary depending on the complexity of the case, the level of agreement between parties, and whether court proceedings are required.

In straightforward cases where both parties are willing to negotiate, costs can often be kept proportionate, especially if matters are resolved early through a Consent Order. However, where there is significant disagreement, non-disclosure, or a formal application to court, the process may involve more extensive legal work, including representation at hearings and disclosure of financial documents