Ariana Grande, the 30-year-old pop star known for worldwide smash hits like “Yes, And?” and “Thank U, Next”, who has sold over 30 million records, is now making headlines for very different reasons.
Ms Grande and her now ex-husband, Dalton Gomez, started dating in January 2020 and married in a private ceremony at Ms Grande’s home in California on 15 May 2021. However, they were not feted to grow old together and the couple officially separated on 20 February 2023.
Because they had entered into a pre-nuptial agreement before the wedding, the divorce itself was a relatively quick and simple process. The divorce came through on 17 March 2024 in California, and the terms of the financial agreement have now come to light.
Ms Grande paid Mr Gomez a one-off lump sum of $1.25m on a clean-break basis (no maintenance, or alimony, payable) and Mr Gomez will also benefit from half the net proceeds of the sale of their home and a payment towards his legal fees capped at $25,000.
A salutary tale, then, about the pitfalls of living one’s life in the glare of the world’s unforgiving media eye. Beyond this, though, there are pearls of wisdom to glean from Ms Grande’s divorce.
Most people do not sign a pre-nuptial agreement (PNA) in the UK, perhaps because most people cannot envisage having sufficient assets to argue about beyond the family home. Significantly more second marriages ‘benefit’ from a PNA. Having a PNA allows both parties to enter the marriage with their financial eyes wide-open as to what to expect should the marriage fail.
A PNA will help protect any assets, should a marriage end in divorce. It can also help with future tax and estate planning. Broadly speaking, divorces between couples where there is a signed pre-nuptial agreement tend to be cheaper than divorces with no PNA.
On the other hand, PNAs can create future issues, such as ‘red letter days,’ where one party is entitled to far more capital should the marriage survive beyond five-years. All eyes then fall on the anniversary as a potential and obvious flashpoint. The parties’ needs and circumstances can also change over time and the PNA can end up not being ‘fit-for-purpose’. Additionally, there can be high legal costs involved in the preparation of the relevant legal documents.
Pre-nuptial agreements in the UK courts
In the UK, unlike in many US states, a PNA is not automatically binding – it is not guaranteed that the terms will be upheld by a court (should it get that far). The court may contemplate that the ‘weaker party’ did not have time to consider fully with legal advice or was pressured into signing.
Significantly, though, this is not of itself a reason for a court to abandon it, as legal advice and due consideration would no doubt have flagged this up, and often people sign anyway regardless of that risk. Generally, one should assume they are enforceable as that is the gradual direction of travel in the UK legal system.
Should the couple’s circumstances change during the marriage and they have children, or one party becomes seriously ill, then a court is likely to review the agreement (if asked) to ensure that the children’s basic housing and income needs will be met. They will ensure that, if one party is incapacitated, the other will do what is reasonable to make extra provisions financially for them.
Many PNAs would have review clauses for such events, and in reality, few parties would refuse to provide extra in such circumstances; however, should a party refuse, then the courts are likely to impose financial clauses on the agreement to provide in such additional ways as the court sees fit.
Pre-nup or post-nup?
Often, because a PNA is not drafted in time before the wedding, couples sign a post-nuptial agreement upon returning from their honeymoon. This would mirror the terms considered before marriage, but the main risk here is that one person refuses to sign. The courts will bear this in mind on divorce but the risk and lack of clarity as to what would happen is a real issue.
Many couples enter a post-nuptial agreement years after a marriage, to set out what they wish to happen should the marriage fail. Whilst generally the courts will treat these as they would a pre-nup, and it would generally be enforceable, the courts would be looking to see if there are any other, perhaps more malign reasons for entering such an agreement at that point, such as an attempt by one party to move assets away from the weaker spouse and to limit their financial ‘exposure’ on divorce.
Ms Grande’s brief marital sojourn was not without its useful thought-provoking insights, because getting married is a very big step, but getting divorced can be, financially, an even bigger one.