The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and the section 25 factors

What the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 does

The Act has two main parts: Part I on divorce, nullity and other matrimonial proceedings, and Part II on financial relief for the parties to a marriage and the children of the family^[1]. Under section 1, either or both of you can apply for a divorce on the ground that the marriage has broken down irretrievably^[6].

Part II holds the court's financial powers: maintenance pending suit (section 22), periodical payments and lump sums (section 23), property adjustment orders (section 24), orders for sale (section 24A) and pension sharing orders (sections 21A and 24B)^[1][7]. Sections 25 and 25A then say how the court decides whether and how to use those powers^[1].

legislation.gov.uk records the Act as up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 30 August 2026^[1]. See how these powers come together in a financial settlement.

The eight section 25 factors

Section 25(2) lists eight matters, (a) to (h), that the court must "in particular have regard to" for each of you^[2].

Needs, compensation and sharing

The Act does not state what the court is aiming for^[11]. In White v White, Lord Nicholls said that implicitly "the objective must be to achieve a fair outcome", giving first consideration to the children^[11]. A judge should check their view "against the yardstick of equality of division", but that is not a presumption of equal division, which he said would be "an impermissible judicial gloss" on section 25^[11].

In Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane the House of Lords described three strands of fairness^[15]:

• Needs: "In most cases the search for fairness largely begins and ends at this stage", because the assets are not enough to provide for two homes^[15].
• Compensation: "aimed at redressing any significant prospective economic disparity between the parties arising from the way they conducted their marriage"^[15].
• Sharing: each is entitled to an equal share of the assets of the partnership "unless there is a good reason to the contrary", and equality is "an aid, not a rule"^[15].

In Standish v Standish (2025) the Supreme Court said the sharing principle applies only to matrimonial property, the fruits of the marriage, while property brought into the marriage or inherited can still be used to meet needs or compensation^[16]. The Family Justice Council says that where the assets do not exceed both partners' needs, assets from before the marriage or inherited during it go into the pot^[8].

Reform: where things stand, as at September 2026

The Law Commission's scoping report, published on 18 December 2024, concluded that financial remedies law needs reform but made no recommendations^[3]. It found the law does not "provide a cohesive framework in which parties to a divorce or dissolution can expect fair and sufficiently certain outcomes", and set out four models: codification, "codification-plus", guided discretion and a default matrimonial property regime^[3].

The Ministry of Justice consultation "A fairer end to relationships" ran from 5 June to 14 August 2026 and proposes a "codification-plus" model^[17]. It would write the "needs" and "sharing" principles into law, with equal sharing of matrimonial property as the starting point unless unequal division is needed to meet needs, and a three-stage approach to needs with a child's welfare first^[17]. It proposes keeping the section 25 factors largely as they are, adding a compensation factor for economic disadvantage suffered during the marriage, requiring the court to consider pensions, and introducing binding "qualifying nuptial agreements"^[17].

As at 28 September 2026 the outcome had not been published, and the consultation says any legislation will be introduced when parliamentary time allows^[17]. Until the law changes, section 25 and the case law above are what a court applies^[1][16].