DOCUMENT 普通法 · 婚姻信托 nuptial settlement + exclusion clause 离婚穿透防御最后审阅 · 2026-05-28

nuptial settlement deed 与排除条款解读

ante-nuptial / post-nuptial settlement · exclusion clause · MCA 1973 § 24(1)(c)–(d) 穿透限度

李先生 2018 年和英籍太太结婚 · 2019 年新加坡律师建议设立一份"婚后信托" · 把家族部分股权（USD 18M）放进 Cayman discretionary trust · settlor = 李先生 + 配偶共同 · 受益人 = 婚内子女 + 双方无个人受益权。律师特别在 deed 中加了一条"exclusion clause"——"in the event of divorce or legal separation, the spouse of either Settlor shall cease to be a Beneficiary and shall not be entitled to any distribution or interest hereunder."律师当时跟李先生说："这条让你太太离婚后自动出局 · 信托完全保护起来了。"2024 年伦敦家事法院在李夫妇离婚案中 · 妻子律师援引 MCA § 24(1)(c) 申请varying the settlement·法官在判决中说："the exclusion clause does not deprive this court of jurisdiction; the settlement is a 'nuptial settlement' within the meaning of section 24, and I have full power to vary its terms notwithstanding the exclusion clause." 结果 GBP 8.3M 从信托中变现给妻子。律师当年的"保护承诺" 在英国法院前完全无效。

本文解读这份在跨境家事场景中最危险的合同——nuptial settlement deed + exclusion clause——结构、条款、英国 / 中国 / HK 不同法域的可穿透性。

文件类型 + 当事方

文件性质：trust deed（多为 discretionary）· 因设立时间 / 设立人身份 / 受益人范围关联到夫妻婚姻 · 在英国 / HK 等普通法下归类为nuptial settlement
当事方：(a) settlor(s)（多为夫妻共同 · 但可以一方）· (b) trustee · (c) protector · (d) beneficiaries（多为夫妻 + 子女）
nuptial settlement 定义：英国判例 Brooks v Brooks [1996] AC 375——"a disposition with continuing provisions for one or both spouses with or without provision for their children" · 即 "为夫妻 / 子女作长期持续 provision 的安排"
关键：nuptial 状态不由 deed 表面声明决定 · 由法院根据 substance 判定——deed 写 "this is not a nuptial settlement" 无效

标准条款 1 · settlor + 资产

CLAUSE 1 · Settlor and Trust Property

[Settlor 1] and [Settlor 2], being husband and wife (or intended husband and wife), each having full capacity, hereby settle the property listed in Schedule A upon the Trustee to be held upon the trusts and with the powers and provisions hereinafter declared, for the benefit of the Beneficiaries.

标准条款 2 · beneficiaries（含 / 不含配偶）

CLAUSE 2 · Beneficiaries · Variant A (Includes Spouses)

The "Beneficiaries" shall be: (a) the Settlors, (b) any spouse or former spouse of either Settlor, (c) the issue of the Settlors, both born and to be born, (d) such other persons as the Trustee may from time to time, with the prior written consent of the Protector, add to the class.

CLAUSE 2 · Beneficiaries · Variant B (Excludes Spouses)

The "Beneficiaries" shall be: (a) the issue of the Settlors, both born and to be born, (b) charity organisations as may be designated, (c) the Trustee shall not, at any time, make any distribution to or for the benefit of either Settlor or any spouse / former spouse of either Settlor.

标准条款 3 · exclusion clause（核心 "保护"）

CLAUSE 3 · Spousal Exclusion on Divorce

Notwithstanding any other provision herein, in the event that the Settlors are divorced or legally separated, the spouse of either Settlor (or any former spouse) shall (a) cease to be a Beneficiary, (b) not be entitled to any distribution or interest hereunder, (c) not be considered in any Letter of Wishes or trustee deliberation. The Trustee shall act as though such spouse had predeceased the Settlor for all purposes of this Deed.

标准条款 4 · letter of wishes 配套

CLAUSE 4 · Letter of Wishes

The Settlors have executed a Letter of Wishes concurrently herewith. The Letter of Wishes is non-binding guidance to the Trustee on (a) family circumstances, (b) preferred distribution patterns, (c) divorce contingency planning, (d) education and welfare priorities for the children. The Trustee shall take the Letter of Wishes into account but is not bound by it.

关键 trap clause 1 · "exclusion" 不能 override MCA § 24

TRAP · exclusion clause does not bind UK / HK courts

Sample over-claim: 销售方律师说 "this exclusion clause makes the trust divorce-proof."

问题：MCA § 24(1)(c) + (d) 授权法院"vary" 或"extinguish/reduce" 任何 nuptial settlement 中夫妻 / 配偶的利益——exclusion clause不能剥夺法院这一管辖。Brooks v Brooks 路线下 · 即使 deed 把配偶完全排除 · 法院仍可命令"vary the settlement" 给配偶 (i) 一次性 lump sum (ii) 部分 settlement 转移 (iii) trustee 调整受益人范围。HK § 7 MPPO 同样路径

关键 trap clause 2 · "settlor 单独 + 婚前" 误判

TRAP · "pre-nuptial single-settlor = not nuptial"

Sample over-claim: "trust 是婚前设立 · settlor 只有丈夫一人 · 妻子不是 beneficiary · 这不是 nuptial settlement"

问题：英国判例（Charman / Joy v Joy-Morancho）确立——nuptial settlement 的认定按substance:(i) trust 是否在夫妻关系预期 / 存续期间持续 provision (ii) 任一方 / 子女是否实际从 trust 受益 (iii) trust 是否被作为夫妻经济生活的一部分。婚前设立 + 单一 settlor + 配偶不是 named beneficiary——这三点都不能完全排除 nuptial settlement 认定

关键 trap clause 3 · firewall 在英国法院前不绑定

TRAP · "Cayman / BVI firewall protects against UK divorce"

Sample dangerous: "trust 设立地是 Cayman · § 90 firewall 保护 · UK family court 没法穿透"

问题：firewall 在Cayman 法院诉讼中坚固——但英国 / HK 家事法院不被 firewall 约束。Cayman firewall 阻止的是 forced heirship / community property 等 home-jurisdiction rule 入侵 Cayman trust——但不阻止英国法院对 settlor / beneficiary个人颁布 in personam orders。法院可命令 settlor "use his power as protector to remove trustee" + "appoint new trustee" + "vary settlement"。如不配合 → contempt of court

关键 trap clause 4 · 婚后 add property 的 nuptial 化

TRAP · post-nuptial additions to a "pre-nuptial" trust

Sample: 婚前设立的 trust · 婚后陆续 add property · 持续 17 年 add 资产

问题：即使原始 deed 是婚前设立 · 婚后持续 add property 会让 trust 在新 add 部分被认定为 post-nuptial settlement · 法院对这部分有 vary 权。这是中国 HNW 在多年婚姻中陆续装入信托的典型陷阱——婚前那 USD 5M 法院可能不动 · 但婚后陆续 add 的 USD 23M 完全可以 vary

与其他文件的关系

prenup / postnup：婚前 / 婚后协议 · Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 后法院给予显著权重但不绝对；与 nuptial settlement 配套使用是最稳路径
letter of wishes：letter 中明确写"in the event of divorce, the trustee should not distribute to the divorced spouse" 是意图证据· 但法院仍可 override
spouse 个人 settlement 协议：离婚时双方签 settlement agreement · 配偶在协议中"放弃 trust claim" → 法院通常尊重 · 但需双方独立法律意见 + 充分披露· 否则不算 "informed waiver"
中国境内财产协议 § 1065：境内 prenup / postnup · 仅约束境内 + 中国法院 + 中国资产；不直接绑定英国 / HK 法院

失效场景

英国 / HK 法院 family proceedings 立案：exclusion clause 不阻止法院 vary settlement
配偶 disclosure 不全：Form E 中没披露 trust → 法院 adverse inference + 加重判分
settlor 转移资产：family proceedings 后转移 trust assets → contempt + 加重判分 + § 21M cross-border injunction
trustee 配合 settlor：trustee 在 family proceedings 期间未独立行事 / 应 settlor 指示行动 → sham 嫌疑 → trust 整体效力被攻击
prenup / postnup 缺失 + nuptial 全部资产：没 prenup + trust 是 nuptial → 法院 vary 权最大

cross-link

引用

Statutes

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (UK) § 23 / 24 / 24A / 25
Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Ordinance (HK Cap. 192) § 7

Cases

Brooks v Brooks [1996] AC 375 · nuptial settlement 定义
Joy v Joy-Morancho [2015] EWHC 2507 (Fam) · trust 与 nuptial 关系
Charman v Charman [2007] EWCA Civ 503
BJ v MJ [2011] EWHC 2708 (Fam) · vary nuptial settlement 路径
Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42 · prenup 权重