For many divorcing couples, prenuptial agreements help to limit financial conflict. They have already set terms for the distribution of their property, and so they can easily move forward with the divorce with limited negotiations and fewer opportunities for disputes.
Occasionally, one spouse may question the validity of a prenuptial agreement and may insist they do not intend to honor it. When that occurs, the other spouse must choose between agreeing to set the prenuptial agreement aside or litigating to enforce it.
Is litigation to enforce a prenup agreement worth the time and money invested in that process?
Every marital estate is unique
The extent of the marital estate, the complexity of joint assets and other unique details about the marriage may influence whether upholding a prenuptial agreement is a worthwhile undertaking or not. For example, if one spouse designated the home they owned before getting married or the business they started as separate property, shielding those resources from the asset division process can be worth the cost of litigation and the delays the process may create.
When one spouse claims the prenuptial agreement contains inappropriate terms or is unconscionable, going to court may be the only way to enforce the terms previously set. Making the decision to litigate based on principle alone may not be the most practical solution for those facing a divorce. People who signed now-contested prenuptial agreements before getting married may need to review financial records and the prenuptial agreement at length with a legal professional.
Weighing the benefits and drawbacks of litigation can help people determine if they should go to family court to enforce their prenup agreement. Legal guidance can help people make decisions rooted in practical reality rather than emotional reactions during a divorce.