The changes would see pre-nups, once considered vulgar and socially unacceptable in British society, enshrined in law and recognised in divorce courts.
Currently, such contracts – drawn up by couples to establish how assets would be divided up in the event of a divorce – are not legally binding although they may be taken into account by a judge.
The country's official adviser on family law has told The Sunday Telegraph that the fear of big payouts should a marriage fail is deterring some people from getting wed in the first place.

If someone demanded a pre-nup, would you marry them?

If someone demanded a pre-nup, would you marry them?

It think in today's world pre-nups will only be any good if you contractually make sure you don't have to incur another party's debt.

I wonder if the banks or credit card companies will accept the pre nup as a valid excuse for why you should not be chased for your loved ones debts re shoes.

Yes but if you share an address your partners poor credit can affect all others at that address.

True, but I hate, nay despise the way lending companies try and convince people that they're somehow responsible for their relative's debt. They're not, and TBH I wish those companies who tried it had their licence to lend suspended or revoked.

Personally, I think this should be practically compulsory.

If it stops money-grabbing whores from marrying some rich guy and then divorcing them, taking half of his earnings, then I'm happy. As Dave Chapelle said, no pu$$y is worth £3million - it'd have to be lined with gold and encrusted with jewels for it to be worth that much.

Personally, I think this should be practically compulsory.

If it stops money-grabbing whores from marrying some rich guy and then divorcing them, taking half of his earnings, then I'm happy. As Dave Chapelle said, no pu$$y is worth £3million - it'd have to be lined with gold and encrusted with jewels for it to be worth that much.