Marriage and relationship breakdown in farming families are often highly complex, not least because the farm is usually the family home and provides one or both parties with a living. Speaking at the firm’s recent ‘Succession and Diversification’ seminar, Gemma Whitchurch, Partner in the Family Law team at Sydney Mitchell, explored what a breakdown often involves, and what can be done to help protect a farm’s assets.
“Marriage breakdown and the associated financial implications can be difficult,” Gemma said. “In farming cases it can often be more complex given that the farm is usually the family home, provides one or both parties with a living, and can be a multi-generational asset involving trusts/parentships agreements for instance.
“In the majority of cases the Court will order the instruction of suitable experts to value the farm, to include land, machinery and buildings.
“It may be that to reach a final outcome the Court will divide up areas of the farm, which may involve the sale of land or buildings that in turn could impact on the farm’s future income stream and viability.
Family home
The family home is usually an asset subject to equal sharing, and in a farming case, the family home can sit in the middle of the farm and may have been inherited through generations: “The Court considers the housing needs and income needs of both parties on divorce, with the housing needs of any minor children being the first consideration,” explained Gemma. “This may mean the Court has to look at other creative solutions to see how the non-farming spouse’s housing needs are to be met.
“Potentially, a divorce will impact on other family members as many others will work in the business and/or be part of the farming business structure. This can have long lasting implications on future working and personal relationships.”
When making such orders, the Court has a wide discretion to make such orders: “The Court will make orders it considers fair in all the circumstances of a case. It will avoid breaking up farms and look at offsetting or deferred payments if it can, but if there is no alternative, then the Court can order the sale of all or part of the farm.”
How to safeguard the farm
What can family farm owners do to protect against this in the first place, as well as attempt to safeguard the farm?
“In short, pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements,” said Gemma.
“Pre-nups should be entered into no less than 28 days prior to marriage with both parties having the opportunity to receive legal advice and, at the very least, a full schedule of disclosure exchanged.
“The pre nup should be fair to both parties and not leave one party without anything. If it does, then the pre-nup is unlikely to be upheld by the Court. Presently, pre-nups are not binding but they do serve to set out the parties’ intentions in the event of a relationship breakdown and will be given appropriate weight as determined by the Court.
“If parties are already married, a post-nuptial agreement may be appropriate. The same conditions of it needing to be fair also apply to post-nups.
“We recommend all agreements are reviewed at least every five years and on every significant change in circumstance, such as one party receiving inheritance or children being born. This ensures the agreements are up to date and properly reflect the parties’ current intentions. Attempts to rely on a nuptial agreement 10 years down the line that has not been regularly reviewed may be problematic and the agreement may carry little weight, in particular if there have been significant changes in the parties circumstances.”
Cohabitation agreements
Cohabitation agreements may also be appropriate if couples are thinking of living together, Gemma explained:
“In July 2025, the Supreme Court handed down its judgement on the case of Standish and Standish, which dealt with the treatment of matrimonial and non-matrimonial property. The judgement means that non-matrimonial property may be argued as the farm which is an inherited asset and should be excluded from the matrimonial pot on divorce. This judgement confirmed that the sharing principle is to be applied only to matrimonial property i.e., property/assets that parties have acquired together, and that should normally be shared on an equal basis.
“Typically, non-matrimonial property is property brought in by one party or acquired by a party through inheritance or gift., i.e., the farm. Over time, the farm may become “matrimonialised”, but this depends on how it has been treated throughout the course of the marriage.
“However, even if the Court can be persuaded that the farm is entirely non-matrimonial, the Court can still look to invade that on the principle of needs.
“This all highlights the need for agreements that clearly set out parties’ intentions at the outset of a relationship, and ensuring these are reviewed during the relationship/marriage.”
The the ‘Succession and Diversification - Protecting the next generation’ event was hosted by Sydney Mitchell at Becketts Farm, one of the West Midlands Agri business diversification success stories and currently led by the Beckett’s family’s fourth generation Adrian Beckett, in November. 2025.
Get in touch
For pragmatic, no-nonsense advice and practical solutions on how our team can help you with your family or divorce matter, please get in touch on 0121 746 3360 or submit an online enquiry form and we will get back to you shortly.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
