Case No. RS20D03594

[2010] UKSC 42 as it provided no provision for the Wife at all, such that she would undoubtedly have ended up in a “predicament of real need”. Second, it was only supposed to last for three years or the birth of the parties’ first child, whichever was sooner. At that point, it was to be reviewed. The thinking behind this was clearly appropriate, namely that the Wife would require and be entitled to provision at that stage but there was no review. The parties just forgot about the Agreement entirely. Although a careful reading of clause 13 shows that the Agreement was to continue in the absence of such a review, the continuation was only in the most technical of senses. Third, I am satisfied that it would not have been enforced in Country X. Fourth, the fact that the Husband could not even lay his hands on the executed document shows the extent to which the parties abandoned this Agreement, even if they had ever really intended to abide by it. I do not need to resolve the issue as to whether or not it was produced and signed one evening in the family home or whether the parties went to the solicitors’ offices to do so, as that is irrelevant. It does show how memory can play funny tricks on the mind as I am quite clear that both parties genuinely believe their separate accounts of what happened, whereas only one can actually be correct.