If you have read that prenups “might become binding” in England & Wales, the idea behind that is the Law Commission’s proposal for Qualifying Nuptial Agreements, or QNAs. It is an important and much-discussed proposal – but it is crucial to understand one thing up front: it is not yet law. Prenups today remain highly persuasive rather than automatically binding (see are prenups legally binding?).
This guide explains where QNAs came from, what would make an agreement “qualify”, what would happen if the reform became law, and – most usefully – why making your prenup carefully now already meets almost everything a future law would require.
The background: the 2014 report
In February 2014, the Law Commission of England and Wales published its report Matrimonial Property, Needs and Agreements. Among its recommendations was the creation of a new kind of agreement – a Qualifying Nuptial Agreement – that a court would be bound to follow, removing the discretion that currently applies to prenups. The aim was to give couples real certainty, which today’s prenups, being not automatically binding, cannot fully provide. The report built on the direction of travel set by Radmacher v Granatino four years earlier.
What would make an agreement “qualifying”
Under the proposal, an agreement would only qualify – and so become binding – if it met strict conditions. Broadly, it would need to be:
- Made as a deed, including a statement that both partners understand it is a binding QNA that removes the court’s discretion to decide financial claims (see executing as a deed).
- Not signed in the 28 days before the wedding – the “28-day rule” designed to stamp out last-minute pressure (see when to sign a prenup).
- Supported by material financial disclosure from both partners (see full and frank disclosure).
- Made with independent legal advice for each partner at the time they entered into it (see independent legal advice).
Look closely and you will notice these conditions are simply today’s best practice written into law.
The one thing even a QNA could not do
Crucially, even a qualifying agreement would not be allowed to leave a partner – or any children – without their needs met. The needs principle would remain as a backstop, and provision for children would still be for the court. In other words, QNAs would give couples much greater certainty about surplus assets, but not a licence to leave someone destitute. This is the same fairness limit that runs through the whole of prenup law (see when is a prenup unfair?).
Where things stand now
More than a decade on, these recommendations have not been brought into law. Family-law reform has moved slowly, and the topic has periodically returned to public attention (see prenups in the news), but as things stand prenups continue to be governed by the case-law principles: a fair agreement, freely entered into with disclosure and advice, is given significant weight, but the court keeps the final say. For now, the honest position is the one set out across our case-law guide.
Why a careful prenup is already future-proof
Here is the reassuring part. Because the QNA conditions – deed, 28-day rule, disclosure, independent advice, provision for needs – mirror today’s best practice almost exactly, a prenup made carefully now already does the things a future law would require. If the reform ever arrives, a well-made agreement is well placed to benefit; if it does not, that same agreement is still as robust as it can be under the current law. Either way, you win by doing it properly. That is why our guidance on what to include in a prenup focuses on disclosure, advice, fair terms and proper signing.
How a QNA would differ from a prenup today
The practical difference is about certainty. Today, even a perfectly made prenup is not automatically binding: a court gives it significant weight but keeps its discretion, and a partner can always argue it would be unfair to enforce (see can a prenup be overturned?). A qualifying agreement would, in principle, remove that discretion over the sharing of surplus assets – the court would be bound to give effect to it, rather than merely inclined to. What would not change is the protection of needs and children, which would remain outside what any agreement could sign away.
What couples should do in the meantime
Because the law has not changed, the sensible course today is to make your prenup as though the QNA rules already applied. Concretely, that means: exchange full disclosure, each take independent legal advice, sign at least 28 days before the wedding, execute the document as a deed, and keep the terms fair. You get the strongest possible agreement under the current law, and one that is well placed to benefit if reform ever arrives.
Why reform has been so slow
If the case for QNAs is so widely accepted, why are they still not law more than a decade after the 2014 report? Part of the answer is that family-law reform is politically sensitive and rarely a priority for parliamentary time.
But there is also a genuine sticking point: the Law Commission’s recommendation on binding agreements was tied to wider, thornier questions about how the law should treat “needs” and the sharing of matrimonial property on divorce – questions on which there is far less consensus.
Governments have periodically revisited the area, and in June 2026 the Ministry of Justice consulted on making qualifying nuptial agreements binding ('A fairer end to relationships', CP 1581, closed 14 August 2026). That is a consultation only: nothing has been enacted and the Radmacher approach still applies. For couples, the practical upshot is simple: do not wait for the law to change before making an agreement, because the current, case-law-based approach already gives a well-made prenup real force.
How QNAs compare with other countries
Much of the impetus behind QNAs is that England & Wales is unusual among comparable jurisdictions in not treating marital agreements as binding. In many European countries a notarised marriage contract is a normal, enforceable part of getting married. In much of the United States, prenups are binding contracts subject to statutory safeguards (see UK vs US prenups). Even within the UK, Scotland takes a somewhat different approach.
A QNA regime would bring England & Wales closer to that international mainstream, giving couples the certainty that families with cross-border ties often expect (see international prenups and whether a UK prenup is recognised abroad). Until then, the honest position is that a domestic agreement here is highly persuasive rather than automatically binding – which is exactly why the safeguards matter so much.
What a QNA would and would not change – at a glance
- Would change: a qualifying agreement would remove the court’s discretion over the sharing of surplus assets, so a couple could rely on their bargain about who keeps what above the needs line.
- Would not change: the protection of needs and of children would remain, outside anything a couple could sign away.
- Would formalise: the conditions – deed, 28-day rule, disclosure, independent advice – that are today’s best practice would become legal requirements rather than merely sensible steps.
Seen that way, QNAs would not overturn the current philosophy so much as harden the good bits of it into rules – which is why preparing your agreement to today’s best practice is the smartest hedge either way.
Qualifying nuptial agreements: will prenups become binding?
Qualifying nuptial agreements (QNAs) are the Law Commission’s 2014 proposal to make prenups binding if strict conditions are met – made as a deed, signed at least 28 days before the wedding, with material disclosure and independent advice on both sides. Crucially, this is not yet law, and even a QNA could not override needs. The reassuring part: those conditions mirror today’s best practice, so a careful prenup is already future-proof.
Where the proposal stands after the 2024 scoping report
The 2014 report was more than a recommendation; it came with a draft Nuptial Agreements Bill and a set of numbered conditions that are still the reference point. Paragraph 6.63 set the timing rule, that a qualifying agreement be made at least 28 days before the wedding. Paragraph 6.91 set the disclosure requirement, and paragraph 6.88 explained that what must be disclosed is material information about the other party's financial situation, not every asset. Chapter 6 made legal advice for each party a condition. And the needs limit was built in: even a qualifying agreement could not be used to leave a party without provision for their needs, or to prejudice children.
The Law Commission returned to the subject on 18 December 2024 in its financial remedies scoping report, which examined whether the whole law of money on divorce needs reform. It set out four models, from codifying the present law through to a matrimonial property regime that would confine the court's discretion, and identified statutory rules on nuptial agreements as one of the discrete reforms Parliament could enact under the middle models. The Government took the nuptial-agreements strand forward in June 2026 with a consultation, 'A fairer end to relationships' (CP 1581), proposing binding qualifying nuptial agreements executed as deeds with advice and disclosure; it closed on 14 August 2026 and, as of this writing, nothing has been legislated.
In the meantime the courts have moved some distance on their own. The Supreme Court's 2025 decision in Standish v Standish confined the sharing principle to matrimonial property and confirmed that assets brought into a marriage stay separate unless treated as shared, which is the outcome most prenups are drafted to secure, and the Radmacher v Granatino test continues to give a properly made agreement significant weight. A prenup made to the 2014 conditions today is in the strongest position the current law allows, and is best placed to qualify if a future statute is applied to agreements already made.
Qualifying nuptial agreements: FAQs
Are qualifying nuptial agreements law yet?
No – the 2014 recommendations have not been enacted, so prenups remain persuasive rather than automatically binding (see are prenups legally binding?).
Would a QNA be fully binding?
More so than a prenup today, but still subject to meeting needs and providing for children (see the needs principle).
What is the 28-day rule?
A proposed requirement that a qualifying agreement must be signed at least 28 days before the wedding – already sensible practice today (see when to sign a prenup).
Do QNA conditions match current best practice?
Almost exactly – deed, disclosure, independent advice and good timing are what make a prenup robust now (see what to include in a prenup).
If the law changes, will my existing prenup become binding?
That would depend on the transitional rules of any new law, but an agreement already meeting the QNA-style conditions is best placed to benefit.
Who proposed qualifying nuptial agreements?
The Law Commission of England and Wales, in its 2014 report Matrimonial Property, Needs and Agreements.
Why has the reform not become law?
Family-law reform moves slowly and the recommendation was tied to wider, contested questions about needs and sharing – so no settled package has yet been enacted.
Should I wait for QNAs before making a prenup?
No – a well-made prenup already carries significant weight today, and because it meets the QNA-style conditions it is well placed if the law ever changes (see are prenups worth it?).
Create your prenuptial agreement online
UK Prenup lets couples in England & Wales create a prenuptial agreement online, with an independent family-law solicitor's advice before you sign: £750 for one of you, or £1,300 with a solicitor for each of you. See how it works or get started.
UK Prenup is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. A prenuptial agreement in England & Wales is not automatically binding, and both partners should take independent legal advice before signing.