Divorce cases involving inherited wealth and family trusts are often among the most complex disputes that come before the Family Court. In TP v TF (Matrimonialisation; Family Trusts; Fair Division) [2026] EWFC 210, Mr Justice Garrido considered whether a husband’s substantial interest in long-standing family trusts should be shared with his wife following a marriage of more than 20 years. The decision provides important guidance on matrimonialisation, family trusts, and the principle of fair division.
The Background
The husband and wife, both aged 63, married in 2001 and separated in 2024. They had two adult children. The husband’s family wealth had been held through a series of trusts established over generations and connected to a highly successful family business.
At the centre of the dispute was the husband’s interest in a “Capital Allocation Plan” (CAP), created to reflect his contribution to the family enterprise. Although the assets were held within trust structures, the CAP had a net value of approximately £229 million after tax. The husband argued that these assets were not matrimonial property and should remain outside the sharing exercise. The wife contended that the wealth was a resource available to him and had become matrimonial during the marriage.
Following protracted litigation, during which the parties incurred legal costs of more than £6.5 million, the case was decided by Mr Justice Garrido, who delivered a landmark judgment clarifying when wealth held within family trust structures can be treated as matrimonial property and shared on divorce.
When trust assets can be considered on divorce
A common misconception is that assets held in a trust are automatically protected from financial claims on divorce. English family law takes a more practical approach.
The court considered the established principle set out in the case of Charman v Charman, namely whether, if requested, trustees would be likely to make assets available to the beneficiary spouse either immediately or in the foreseeable future.
The trustees’ evidence was significant. They indicated that they would likely provide the husband with the vast majority, and potentially the entirety, of the CAP allocation if asked. On that basis, Mr Justice Garrido concluded that the resource was effectively available to the husband and should therefore be taken into account within the financial remedy proceedings.
The judgment is a reminder that the Family Court is concerned with the reality of access to wealth rather than merely the legal structure in which assets are held.
What is matrimonialisation?
The most important aspect of the case concerns the doctrine of matrimonialisation.
Traditionally, inherited wealth and pre-marital assets are treated differently from assets generated during the marriage. However, the distinction is not absolute. The courts recognise that non-matrimonial property can, in certain circumstances, become matrimonial property through the way it is used, developed or integrated into the marital partnership.
The court applied the principles recently restated by the Supreme Court in the case of Standish v Standish, examining the source of the wealth, its purpose and the extent to which it had become part of the parties’ shared economic life.
Although the CAP originated before the marriage, the judge found that most of its value accrued during the marriage as a consequence of the husband’s work in the family business and the support provided by the wife throughout the relationship.
Crucially, the court rejected the argument that only the husband’s efforts should be recognised. Mr Justice Garrido emphasised that modern family law does not discriminate between different forms of contribution within a marriage and recognised that both spouses contributed equally to the marital partnership.
The outcome
Having concluded that the CAP represented matrimonial property and was a resource available to the husband, the court applied the sharing principle.
The wife was awarded approximately £120.4 million, representing an equal share of the matrimonial value identified by the court after taking account of tax and other relevant adjustments.
Importantly, the judgment did not treat the entirety of the wider family trust structure as available for sharing. Instead, the court undertook a detailed analysis of the husband’s actual access to the assets and confined its findings to the resources that were realistically available to him.
Why this case matters
TP v TF is one of the most significant trust cases in recent years and demonstrates several important principles:
- Wealth held within trusts is not automatically immune from financial claims on divorce.
- The court will look at the practical reality of whether a beneficiary can access trust assets.
- Inherited or family wealth may become matrimonial property through the process of matrimonialisation.
- Contributions made by a spouse who supports the family and the primary earner are regarded as equally valuable.
- Long marriages will often strengthen arguments that wealth accumulated during the relationship should be shared fairly between the parties.
What does this mean for divorcing couples?
For individuals whose wealth is held in family companies, trusts or inherited structures, TP v TF warns against assuming that legal ownership alone will determine the outcome on divorce. The Family Court will carefully examine the origin of the wealth, the purpose of any trust arrangements, the extent of access to those assets and whether the wealth has become part of the parties’ shared marital enterprise.
Early specialist advice is essential where trusts, inherited wealth or family businesses are involved. The financial consequences can be substantial, and the distinction between matrimonial and non-matrimonial property can significantly affect the outcome.
How we can help
At Branch Austin McCormick, we advise clients in high-net-worth and international family law disputes involving trusts, family businesses, inherited wealth and complex asset structures. We work closely with trust specialists, tax advisers and international lawyers to develop strategies that protect our clients’ interests while achieving fair and practical outcomes.
If you are facing a divorce involving family trusts or inherited wealth, please contact Saika Alam Co-Head and Partner in our Family team at sa@branchaustinmccormick.com or 020 7851 0110.
