The remarriage trap is the practical consequence of section 28(3) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. The rule is simple in principle. If you remarry without first having issued a financial application against your former spouse, you lose the right to come back to court for most kinds of financial provision against them. You will have walked into the trap without realising it, and undoing it after the fact is very difficult.
The trap is not triggered by getting divorced. It is triggered by remarrying. So someone who is divorced but has not remarried, and who has not yet made a financial application, still has time. Someone who walks down the aisle for a second time before sorting the finances from the first marriage, however, may find that they have given up rights worth a great deal.
Imagine someone who divorces, agrees a “handshake” division of the family savings, and remarries a year later without ever issuing Form A. If their former spouse later sells a business, receives a large inheritance, or comes into a windfall, the door to a claim against any of that has already closed. The same is true the other way around: a paying party who remarries without a court order in place can find that their former spouse retains live claims against future earnings, savings or property. Either way, the cost of skipping the paperwork is paid years later.
This is one of the most common reasons we tell clients not to delay financial proceedings, even where the divorce itself feels relatively amicable.
To understand the trap, it helps to separate three things in the divorce timeline.
**3. The binding financial remedy order.** This is the order the court eventually makes (often by consent), recording the financial outcome and either dismissing or ordering ongoing claims.
Of those three steps, only the second — issuing Form A before you remarry — is what stops the trap closing. The divorce on its own does not protect your financial claims, and the final order can only follow once Form A has been issued.
The trap closes when the second of the three above is missing. If you have not issued Form A by the time you remarry, you are out of time for most types of claim. You cannot start them later, even if your former spouse becomes very wealthy or your circumstances become very difficult.
Section 28(3) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 bars applications under sections 23 and 24 of that Act once you have remarried without having issued an application first. In practical terms, the following claims are lost:
Lump sum orders — capital payments from your former spouse.
Property adjustment orders** — orders dealing with the family home, investment property or other land.
Periodical payments (spousal maintenance) — regular ongoing payments to you.
The claims that survive your remarriage (subject to having made an application in time) are:
Pension sharing orders** — a share of your former spouse’s pension can still be sought. This is because section 28(3) was never updated to cover pension sharing when it was introduced by the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 — a quirk of drafting, but a useful one. Best practice is still to apply before remarrying.
Pension attachment orders — in limited circumstances.
Child maintenance and child-related applications — the rule does not affect the welfare of children, who are protected separately.
There is a mirror-image rule worth knowing about. Section 28(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 ends ongoing spousal maintenance automatically when the receiving spouse remarries. So if you are receiving maintenance from your former spouse and you remarry, that maintenance stops on the date of the new marriage. People often confuse this with the remarriage trap itself — they sit next to each other in the same section, but they do different jobs.
So the remarriage trap is not absolute. Some claims survive. But the big-ticket items (capital, property and maintenance) are exactly the ones that most divorcing couples need to deal with, which is what makes the trap so damaging.
Under the procedure before the no-fault divorce reforms, the divorce petition itself contained a tick-box “prayer” for financial relief — in effect a built-in placeholder for the petitioner’s financial claims. Since 6 April 2022 the divorce application form has no equivalent, so it is now even more important for both parties to make sure that a formal financial application has been issued, or a binding consent order obtained, before any remarriage.
In practical terms, if you are in any of the following positions, you are at risk:
There is one more group worth flagging. A valid overseas marriage that is recognised in England and Wales will trigger the trap, even if it was not what you would normally think of as a “British” wedding. The opposite is also true: a religious-only ceremony that does not amount to a legally valid marriage under English law (for example, a nikah that was never followed by a civil registration) will not, on its own, trigger the trap — but the law on this is fact-sensitive and the wrong assumption can be very expensive, so do not rely on it without taking advice.
If any of those apply, you should speak to specialist family law solicitors before you remarry, not after.
There are two clean ways to avoid the remarriage trap.
Already remarried? If you are a parent and you have already remarried without sorting out the finances, all is not necessarily lost. Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 lets you apply for financial provision for the benefit of a child — including lump sums, transfers of property to provide a home for the child, and maintenance on top of any Child Maintenance Service calculation. It is not a substitute for the spousal claims you may have given up, but it is an important route that survives remarriage.
The wrong approach is to wait, on the basis that “we’ll sort it out one day”. One day rarely comes, and remarriage closes the door without warning.
Cohabitation is not the same as remarriage in this context. Living with a new partner does not, on its own, trigger the remarriage trap, because the trap is triggered by a new legal marriage or civil partnership. However, cohabitation can still affect ongoing financial outcomes, particularly spousal maintenance, where a new partner’s income or shared living costs can be relevant. Long-term cohabitation can also affect what the court thinks is fair if you eventually go back to court for variation of an existing order.
If your ex-spouse is cohabiting with a new partner, that does not automatically restart your claims either. Take advice on the specific facts.
If you are divorced, divorcing, or thinking about remarriage, please get in touch before you take the next step. A short conversation now can save a great deal later. Our specialist family lawyers at Lawson West offer caring, supportive and completely independent advice. We will help you understand whether the remarriage trap applies to you, what claims you have, and the cleanest way to protect your position. We offer a FREE initial discussion, with No Win No Fee and Legal Expenses insurance funding available where appropriate.
Call our family team on 0116 212 1000 for Leicester, or 01858 445 480 for Market Harborough, or complete our free online Contact Us form and we will be in touch as soon as possible. The first phone call is often the hardest to make. We’re here to help.
Yes. Entering into a new civil partnership has the same effect as remarrying for the purposes of section 28(3) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. The equivalent provision for civil partnerships is Schedule 5, paragraph 48 of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (which bars new applications), with paragraph 47 mirroring section 28(1) by automatically ending periodical payments on a new civil partnership or marriage. The rule applies the same way regardless of whether the new relationship is a marriage or a civil partnership. The same considerations apply to the dissolution of an existing civil partnership.
Their remarriage closes off some of their claims against you, but it does not affect your claims against them, as long as you have issued your application before you remarry yourself. Their remarriage may also bring spousal maintenance to an end if they are receiving any from you.
The court has very limited power to set aside the effect of section 28(3). The starting point is that the trap is closed. There may, however, be alternative routes depending on your circumstances. For parents, Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 can support a lump sum, maintenance or transfer of property for the benefit of a child. Where there is jointly-owned property, an application under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA) may be available to resolve ownership and occupation. In some cases contractual or proprietary remedies may also apply. None of these are a substitute for what you have lost, but they can make a real difference. Specialist advice from family lawyers is essential as soon as you realise you may be in this position.
Not necessarily. A separation agreement is not the same as a court order, and the remarriage trap is about court applications. The safest route, before remarriage, is to ask the court to convert the separation agreement into a consent order. This is usually a straightforward process where the terms remain fair.
Not in the same way as it affects capital and maintenance, but you still need to act in time. Section 28(3) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 was never updated to cover pension sharing, so a pension sharing order can in principle be applied for after remarriage. In practice, the safest course is still to make sure your financial application is properly issued before any new marriage — relying on the pension exception alone leaves more room for argument than it should. The trap is most damaging in relation to lump sums, property adjustment and maintenance.
There is no fixed time limit, in principle, but the remarriage trap and the practical reality of evidence becoming stale mean that doing it sooner is much better than later. Most family lawyers will advise resolving finances at the same time as the divorce, or very shortly after.
Take advice quickly. Even a single call with a specialist family law solicitor can clarify your position and help you decide what to do before any major life event such as remarriage. The cost of advice is a fraction of the value of what could be lost.
No. The remarriage trap is a feature of divorce law that only applies where you were previously married or in a civil partnership. Cohabiting couples do not have the same financial framework on separation, although there are sometimes property and child-related claims that should be addressed separately — see our guidance on cohabiting couples and unmarried financial support for children.
Great client service is at the centre of our thinking, it’s embodied into how we train and develop our staff, how we help our clients and how we advise and assist people and business owners with their legal needs.
Our Core Values are Welcoming, Confident, Supportive, Knowledgeable and Dependable and we aim for clients to have a positive experience with Lawson West Solicitors.
Evidence of our great client service can be seen in the reviews and testimonials we regularly receive. We are always pleased to receive great reviews because it means our clients are happy with the service we provide, and it shows that we deliver on our core values, we don’t just talk about them. We really welcome client feedback and hope you enjoy reading some of the latest testimonials throughout this website.
