Newspage Raw

Copy article

Court cases over divorce finances hit highest level since 2008: What does this mean about pensions?

ended 30. September 2026

The number of court cases over finances following divorce has risen to its highest level since 2008, new analysis of Ministry of Justice data reveals.

Newspage analysis of the latest Family Court Statistics, sponsored by Evolution Financial Planning, found 49,320 financial remedy cases were started in England and Wales in the 12 months to June 2026.

Financial remedy cases are the court process used to formally deal with finances following divorce or dissolution, including issues involving property, maintenance, lump sums and pensions.

The latest figure is the highest since 2008, when 50,915 cases were recorded. There were 47,524 cases started in 2025, compared with 43,869 in 2024 and 37,422 in 2014. That means the annual number increased by 27% between 2014 and 2025.

In 2025, 40.4% of respondents at financial remedy hearings had no legal representation, up from 28.4% in 2011.

Previous Ministry of Justice figures show pension sharing disposals equivalent to 10 for every 100 divorces in 2019. The equivalent figure was 12.5 in every 100 in 2018.

  • What does this mean for pension sharing?
  • Will women miss out if pensions are not shared in divorce?
  • Will pensions be overlooked if people don't have legal representation at financial remedy hearings?

Responses by tomorrow.

 

9 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Star Quote
Copy

Pro
Rebecca RobertsonVerified
Independent Financial Adviser, Planner and Director at Evolution Financial Planning
"I have clients who have spent 20 or 25 years caring for children and supporting their family, only to find themselves facing divorce with little income of their own and limited opportunity to rebuild their career. These women aren't looking for special treatment. They're asking for the financial contributions they made through caring responsibilities and supporting the household to be recognised. As more people try to navigate financial remedy proceedings without professional support, there is a real danger that pensions, often one of the largest assets in a marriage, are overlooked. For many women, that could mean exchanging long-term financial security for short-term survival, with the consequences only becoming apparent when they reach retirement."
Copy

Pro
Philly PonniahVerified
Chartered Wealth Manager and Financial Coach at Philly Financial
A rise in financial remedy cases should mean more couples formally deal with the whole financial picture, including pensions. But it does not guarantee pensions will be shared fairly. Women are particularly at risk of losing out because they are more likely to have smaller pension pots after career breaks, childcare and lower lifetime earnings. The rise in people representing themselves also concerns me. Pensions are complex and easy to undervalue or overlook. Someone may fight hard over the house because it feels tangible, while giving up a pension worth hundreds of thousands of pounds. That can create a huge gap in retirement that only becomes obvious years later.
Copy

Pro
Anita WrightVerified
Chartered Financial Planner at Ribble Wealth Management
The pension sharing figure is weaker evidence than it looks. Ten per hundred divorces counts all divorces, including the many where no financial order is sought. Measured against cases where finances were formally resolved, the proportion is higher. It is also a 2019 figure, set beside caseload data running to June 2026. The 40.4% measures less than it appears to. It counts representation at hearings, and a great many orders are made by consent without a hearing.
An order is an output, not proof that pensions were considered. A case where the pension was examined and properly left alone scores zero. So does one where it was offset with the value understood. So does one where nobody looked. The risk is rarely that pensions are ignored outright. It is that they are traded against the house without anyone establishing what is being given up. A cash equivalent is a price, not a valuation. The useful question is not how often pensions are shared. It is how often anyone checked.
Copy

Pro
Eamonn PrendergastVerified
Chartered Financial Adviser at Palantir Financial Planning Ltd
“One of the biggest financial mistakes in divorce can be fighting to keep the house while overlooking the pension that may fund the next 30 years.”

Pensions are easily misunderstood in divorce. A defined contribution pension has a visible pot, but a final salary pension is a promise of income for life and its cash value may not reflect what that future income is really worth.

This can particularly disadvantage someone with less pension because of childcare, career breaks or part-time work. Taking more of the family home instead of a pension share may solve today's housing problem but create tomorrow's retirement problem.

Pensions don't always need to be divided, but they should never be ignored. For complex cases, a pension expert can assess the benefits, while a financial planner can model the long-term impact of different settlements.

A fair divorce settlement isn't just about today's assets — it's about what both people will have to live on tomorrow.
Copy

Pro
Scott GallacherVerified
Director at Rowley Turton
While more financial remedy cases naturally mean more pensions under the microscope, the real danger isn’t just how they are split — it’s whether they are considered at all.

Women do not necessarily lose out if pensions are not shared. In some cases, retaining a greater share of the family home instead of taking a pension share may be the right outcome. However, there is a longer-term risk where pensions are effectively traded away for housing, particularly where childcare responsibilities and lower earnings limit someone’s ability to rebuild pension provision.

Pensions are often one of the largest marital assets, but also among the most complex and least immediately visible.

In my experience, the risk of them being overlooked is greater where people do not have professional representation. A house is easy to understand today; the value of giving up pension rights may not become apparent until decades later.
Copy

Pro
Nouran MoustafaVerified
Practice Principal & IFA at Roxton Wealth
Divorce creates a brutal financial bias: people want money they can use now, while a pension feels like somebody else’s problem 20 years away.

That is exactly why pensions can be overlooked. Someone may fight over the house because it is visible and immediate, then casually give up a pension worth hundreds of thousands over retirement.

Women are particularly exposed because pension wealth is still significantly unequal. Career breaks, caring responsibilities and lower historic earnings can leave one spouse entering divorce with far less retirement provision.

Lack of legal advice increases the danger. If somebody does not understand what should be valued, disclosed or negotiated, they cannot protect what they do not know exists.

There is an even darker reality: financial dependence can make people feel they cannot afford to leave an unhappy relationship in the first place.

Divorce is not just about dividing today’s money. It is about dividing tomorrow’s life.
Copy

Pro
Samuel Mather-HolgateVerified
Managing Director & IFA at Mather and Murray Financial
Divorce is emotional, but the money cannot be sorted on vibes. Too many people focus on the house, the car or keeping things amicable, while the pension quietly becomes the biggest asset nobody has properly valued. That can hit women especially hard, because career breaks, caring responsibilities and lower pension saving already leave many at a disadvantage. An amicable split is a good aim, but it should not mean walking blind into a lifelong financial mistake. Pension sharing is not a technical footnote; it can be central to whether someone has dignity in retirement. With more people going into financial remedy hearings without lawyers, the risk is obvious: pensions get missed, misunderstood or traded away too cheaply. Even basic legal advice can stop a fair-minded agreement becoming an unfair one.
Copy

Pro
Harvey DhillonVerified
Founder & CEO at Zmartly
It's a mistake to read these figures as more pensions being shared. The Ministry of Justice no longer publishes a breakdown of financial remedy orders by type, so more cases starting cannot tell us whether pension sharing is rising. Women can miss out, but the tax maths isn't why. Most of what comes out of a pension is taxed as income, while selling the home you live in is normally free of capital gains tax. That is why the Pension Advisory Group's guide suggests knocking roughly 15% to 30% off a pension's value when setting it against the house. Swap them pound for pound instead, and on tax alone the person who keeps the home comes out ahead. The real risk is swapping retirement income for a home that pays none. Pensions can easily be overlooked without a lawyer, and even when they aren't, nobody is required to reduce the pension's value for tax. That's left to the couple or the judge, and it's a gap nobody representing themselves can be expected to spot.
Copy

Plus
Malcolm DavidsonVerified
Director at UK Moneyman
The rise in financial remedy cases is a reminder that a divorce settlement must look beyond the family home. Pensions can be worth as much as the property, yet are easier to overlook, particularly without legal advice. Women may be especially exposed after career breaks. Research showing single women increasingly using Equity Release underlines the later-life stakes, in that housing wealth can support retirement, but it should not become a substitute for considering pension sharing at divorce.