As part of divorce proceedings, many couples overlook the importance of putting a legally binding Order in place to deal with the division of matrimonial finances.
It is undoubtedly one of the most important steps in the process, yet many people don’t realise that an agreement can be rejected by the Court.
What is a Consent Order?
A Consent Order is a legal document which makes a financial agreement legally binding following a separation and divorce. It sets out how matrimonial finances are to be divided, including savings, pensions, investments, debts and any other assets held by you or your former partner.
Without a legally binding Consent Order, any agreement reached, whether directly between you, through mediation, or via another form of alternative dispute resolution, is not enforceable. This means that, even if terms are agreed, your former partner could potentially make further financial claims against you in the future, sometimes years after the divorce and even following remarriage.
If a Consent Order is approved by the Court, it will usually bring financial claims between you and your former partner to an end (once the Final Order in the divorce is made), giving both parties certainty and protection for the future.
Why and how often are Consent Orders rejected?
A common concern for divorcing couples is how often Consent Orders are rejected by the Court. While rejection is possible, it is relatively uncommon.
There are no official statistics published on refusal rates. However, in practice, most Consent Orders are approved, particularly where both parties have provided full and frank financial disclosure, taken appropriate legal advice, and the agreement has been properly drafted.
In most cases, judges deal with applications “on paper” without the need for a hearing. Their role is not to renegotiate the settlement, but to ensure that the agreement is fair, reasonable, and legally sound. Where these criteria are met, approval is usually straightforward.
That said, Consent Orders are not simply rubber‑stamped. Judges have a duty to scrutinise the terms, particularly where there is a risk of unfairness or inadequate provision for children. If concerns arise, the Court may reject the Order or, more commonly, request further information or amendments.
The most common reasons for rejection include apparent unfairness in the division of assets, lack of full financial disclosure, poor drafting, or failure to properly consider the needs of any children.
An example of this…
A couple may agree that one party will retain the family home, while the other receives little or no financial provision. While this may seem like a straightforward arrangement, particularly if one party wishes to move on quickly, the Court will still consider whether the outcome is fair.
If the agreement leaves one party in a significantly weaker financial position, especially where there are children involved, the judge is likely to raise concerns and may request further information or amendments before approving the Order.
Importantly, the likelihood of rejection also increases where parties have not taken legal advice. Without guidance, it can be difficult to assess whether an agreement is fair, and even small errors in the documentation can lead to delays.
Conclusion
While Consent Orders can be rejected, this is relatively rare. Most are approved, particularly where the agreement is fair, clearly drafted, and supported by complete financial disclosure.
If you are going through a separation or divorce, taking early legal advice can help ensure that any agreement reached is robust, fair, and capable of being approved by the Court without unnecessary delay.
For more information, please contact...
Niamh Wilson
Solicitor
Niamh Wilson joined Swinburne Maddison in February 2023 as a Trainee Solicitor and qualified as a Solicitor within the Family department in February 2025.…
