Blog
Franco-British Family Relationships: Top Tips à savoir
Claire Wood
When an international angle is added to the mix, the situation can become even more complicated and, if relevant advice is not sought, then parties can run into real trouble later down the line when trying to implement the terms of any settlement reached. In this brief article, we focus on the key considerations for couples with Swiss pension assets divorcing in England and Wales.
Splitting pension assets in financial remedies proceedings in England and Wales
Pension sharing orders are one of the multitude of orders that an English court can make in financial remedy proceedings. In plain English this usually means that money is taken out of a party’s pension and transferred into a new pot in the name of the other party, the aim being to provide the receiving party with either a certain level of capital (from which they can then draw an income at the relevant time) or ensuring that a certain level of income is possible. Pensions cannot, and should not, be treated in the same manner as, for example, real property – a pound in pension is not necessarily worth a pound in liquid cash.
The calculation of (i) the cash equivalent transfer values and (ii) the percentages required to effect the desired division can be complicated and in many cases, a single joint pensions expert will be instructed to provide a report for the parties to use in the proceedings (and to assist settlement negotiations). The expert will often be asked to carry out offsetting calculations. Offsetting is the process by which the right to receive a present or future pension is traded for present capital.
The starting point in financial remedy proceedings in England is an equal division of the matrimonial pot (i.e. assets that came into existence or were built up during the marriage), subject to each party’s portion meeting their respective needs. In terms of pensions, this would mean a division of the total pension pot to enable either equalisation of capital or equalisation of income. A pension sharing order is approved by an English court and sent to the pension provider who will then liaise with both parties/their legal representatives to implement the required division.
Swiss pension assets
Swiss pension assets present a number of challenges in financial remedy proceedings in England and Wales. The first difficulty is that Swiss courts have exclusive jurisdiction over the division of Swiss occupational pensions on divorce. For this reason, Swiss courts cannot give effect to foreign orders purporting to split Swiss pensions between former spouses. Therefore, spouses divorcing in England and Wales will often need to initiate further proceedings in Switzerland to divide their Swiss pension assets once proceedings in this jurisdiction have concluded. Such a course is inevitable in cases where there is insufficient liquid capital to offset a spouse’s entitlement to share in a Swiss pension.
The second difficulty is that, even in a case where offsetting is possible, alighting on correct actuarial values is virtually impossible. The problem is two-fold. First, pension experts in England and Wales will use a wide range of assumptions when calculating pension values and offsetting lump sums (such as risk, rate of return, adjustments for tax etc). Those assumptions are specific to pension assets in this jurisdiction. Actuaries in England and Wales are not qualified to adjust those assumptions to fit foreign pension assets. Some actuaries offer to prepare offsetting calculations disregarding the foreign nature of the pension assets and treating them as domestic pension funds. Such calculations are by their very nature fictional and therefore unsatisfactory.
Second, independent Swiss actuaries will not report on Swiss pension values and offsetting lump sums. The reason for this is simple. In Switzerland, the pension provider is responsible for informing a divorcing spouse of (a) the current value of their pension fund and (b) the amount shareable with the other spouse. Swiss pension providers do not provide offsetting calculations because, in the vast majority of Swiss divorces, pension assets accumulated between the date of the marriage and the date of the divorce application are simply split equally between the parties.
The combination of those factors can leave divorcing spouses with Swiss pensions feeling stuck between a rock and a hard place. Finding the best option to achieve a fair result while limiting implementation costs requires early legal advice and careful financial planning.
Conclusion
This is intended to be a brief summary only. Pensions on divorce is a complicated topic even without the added complexity when international factors must be taken into account. It is always advisable to seek jurisdiction specific legal advice at the outset of any discussions in relation to the treatment and potential division of pensions in the context of a separation.
If you have any questions regarding this blog, please contact our Anglo-French team.
Colleen Hall is a Senior Associate in the Family team. She is a fluent French speaker and advises on all aspects of family law issues, with a particular specialism in cases with an Anglo-French element.
Roxane Reiser is a Barrister at Wilberforce Chambers, her practice covers traditional chancery work, with a particular emphasis on trusts issues in the divorce context. Many of her cases have international elements.
Family relationships involving international couples can be complex and the need for cross-border planning and an understanding of other jurisdictions is critical for family lawyers working in London. Claire Wood helps clients to understand some of the differences in approach across the channel.
For many, the subject of pensions is one that is barely thought about until absolutely necessary. The same is certainly true in the context of divorce proceedings. Unless retirement is imminent, asking clients to think about pensions is a difficult concept for them to grasp. This is particularly true of clients who would be classed as the financially weaker party who may not have ever, or at least not for a long time, contributed to any form of private pension. Self-employed individuals can also find themselves in this same predicament.
Francophone couples living in England or those who own assets here may be surprised at the differences between a standard English prenuptial agreement and the ‘contrats de mariage’ which are so common across continental Europe.
Connie Atkinson was published in the October 2022 edition of ThoughtLeaders4 HNW Divorce magazine discussing the rise of cryptoassets in financial remedies.
The Court of Appeal recently handed down judgment in Helliwell v Entwistle [2025] EWCA Civ 1055, examining the importance of disclosure when entering into a pre-nuptial agreement.
On 30 July 2025, Mr Justice Peel handed down a judgment in the case of BC v BC [2025] EWHC 2016 (Fam), confirming the “sanctity of confidentiality” about Financial Dispute Resolution (‘FDR’) and private FDR (‘pFDR’) hearings.
On 2 July 2025 the Supreme Court handed down its long-awaited judgment in the case of Standish v Standish. Practitioners have been particularly interested to see if, and how, the Court would develop the judicially created principles of ‘needs’, ‘compensation’, and ‘sharing’ which apply to the division of finances on divorce. In particular, what would the Court say in relation to ‘the sharing principle’: should all assets be shared, or only those generated by the parties’ common endeavour during their marriage?
In this blog we consider whether a pre-nuptial agreement is a good option to help protect the estates of vulnerable individuals in the event that their marriage should come to an end.
Whether you consider yourself neurodiverse, you are the loved one of someone who is neurodiverse or you want to support a neurodivergent individual in family proceedings, this blog provides a summary of the best practice which should be used by family lawyers to help neurodivergent individuals navigate the family legal system.
In honour of Pride Month, we are discussing (and celebrating) the diverse paths to parenthood within the LGBTQ+ community. For couples or individuals looking to start a family, there are a number of options available, each with important factors and implications to consider. This short blog touches on some of those considerations.
We are seeing that most HNW advisors regularly signpost clients to the importance of entering into a prenuptial agreement prior to marriage. From our perspective, prenuptial agreements have been rising in popularity, in particular following the 2010 Supreme Court judgment in Radmacher v Granantino, and rightly so. These agreements offer a useful planning tool and can, when drafted appropriately, remove the uncertainty and conflict of contentious divorce proceedings. Alongside the pre-wedding planning, it is important to recognise the need for legal agreements prior to the start of other relationships, or before an international relocation. A prime example of this, which we are seeing more frequently in our practice, is in relation to the French PACS status.
Kingsley Napley represented the applicant parents in the case of Mr and Mrs K v Mr and Mrs Z [2025] EWHC 927 (Fam). The High Court judgment offers importance guidance for those who are intending on entering into a surrogacy arrangement in the future.
The English Channel, La Manche, is only 350 miles long, separating England from France. When looking at divorce principles however, we have historically been oceans apart from France, with significant differences in outcome depending whether the proceedings have taken place in France or in England. French law is based on a civil code, with divorce law applying property regimes to the division of assets, which is often incompatible with the common law, discretionary system in England. In the early years of my Anglo-French practice, French couples living in England were often taken aback to learn that the property regime they chose when they signed their French marriage contract might not be applied by English judges if they divorced in England.
Following the launch of Nuptial, a new service which provides advice on entering into, amending, or contesting pre or post nuptial agreements, we look at the Law Commission’s Scoping Report and some of the different situations that couples are using nuptial agreements.
Pre-nuptial agreements can inevitably protect one party more than the other. Where does this leave love, romance, and the wedding? If not handled correctly, negotiating a pre-nup can have a huge impact on the relationship and wedding preparations.
As family lawyers, we are used to meeting our clients at a time when they are at their most vulnerable. This is intensified when addiction is present within a family. Divorce or separation places an added burden upon everyone involved and those individuals are likely to have experienced or still be experiencing the destruction that addiction can cause, some of it obvious and some of it less so.
Being alive to the particular challenges which may present themselves in a divorce involving addiction is essential but this should be balanced with an understanding that the issues are likely to be different for each client and for each family.
Emotions can run high in legal disputes, particularly in cases involving succession and inheritance, as well as in a family context. In this blog we explore what happens when allegations are made about parentage (more often than not, paternity) and what can be done about it.
It is now 15 years since the UK Supreme Court gave its judgment in Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 on the use and effect of prenuptial (premarital) contracts.
London has long been a popular city for French expats, and despite the reported drop post- Brexit, is still home to a reported 100,000 French nationals many of whom applied for settled status. There are 9 bilingual French schools in London and with the Eurotunnel celebrating 30 years of operation, London remains an attractive residence for French professionals.
It is now some fifteen years since the UK Supreme Court gave its landmark decision in the case of Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 on the use and effectiveness of prenuptial agreements.
We welcome views and opinions about the issues raised in this blog. Should you require specific advice in relation to personal circumstances, please use the form on the contact page.
Or call +44 (0)20 7814 1200
Claire Wood
Colleen Hall
Nevin Rosenberg
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility
Share insightLinkedIn X Facebook Email to a friend Print