When a marriage ends, sorting out the finances can feel overwhelming. Many people worry about what they’ll be left with, where they’ll live, and how the children will be provided for.
Rachael Harwin explains what “needs” and “sharing” mean in financial settlements in divorce.
There is no ‘one size fits all’ approach when it comes to the law surrounding the division of assets in divorce. Courts can exercise their discretion, with fairness being the primary goal to be achieved. The court does this by applying the guiding principles in Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and the leading case law that has developed around it. Two of the most important principles are “needs” and “sharing.”
What do does “needs” mean in divorce?
At the heart of every financial settlement is making sure both people – and especially any children – have what they reasonably need to move forward. This usually includes:
- A home – ensuring both parties have suitable accommodation.
- Day-to-day living costs – covering income needs for food, bills, and other essentials.
- Children’s needs – making sure children are housed, clothed, and supported.
The principle of “needs” was emphasised in Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24, where the House of Lords explained that ensuring fairness often means giving priority to needs, particularly housing and income. If there aren’t enough assets to go around, meeting needs will usually take priority. This can sometimes mean one person receives a larger share to make sure they and the children are properly provided for.
What does “sharing” mean in divorce?
Marriage is seen as a partnership. The sharing principle recognises that both people contributed to building up the family’s wealth – whether through earning, running the home, or raising children.
Property, savings, and pensions built up during the marriage are usually shared equally.
Assets brought into the marriage (for example, inheritance or pre-marital savings) may be treated differently – though they can still be used if needed to meet needs.
The idea of equal sharing was set out clearly in White v White [2001] 1 AC 596, which established that there should be no bias in favour of the breadwinner. The starting point in cases where there’s more than enough to meet both parties’ needs is often a 50/50 split of the assets built up during the marriage.
How do family courts balance needs and sharing?
Every case is unique. In most divorces, the available assets are limited, so needs will drive the outcome. In higher-value cases, once needs are comfortably met, the sharing principle comes to the forefront. As the Supreme Court confirmed in Charman v Charman [2007] EWCA Civ 503, the court looks for a fair balance between needs and sharing, always guided by the overarching test of fairness.
A recent example is Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, where the UK Supreme Court clarified the status of pre-marital assets in divorce proceedings. The case highlighted how courts determine whether assets acquired before the marriage are considered “matrimonial” or “non-matrimonial,” impacting their inclusion in the sharing principle. This decision underscores the importance of understanding how different types of assets are treated in divorce settlements.
Learn more about ‘matrimonialisation’ in divorce.
Why is this important?
Understanding these principles can help take away some of the uncertainty. The court’s focus is on fairness – making sure everyone can move forward with security.
If you’re going through a separation and want clear, practical advice about your financial settlement, our specialist family law team is here to help.
Download our Beginner’s Guide to Divorce handbook.
