My wife and I have lived in our house for 18 years and have a 15-year-old son together.

Our relationship has broken down and we are getting a divorce. I've been staying at my brother's house a lot as it's too tense at home. 

 My wife and I purchased and own the house we live in together. I'm still in panic mode and have no clue what will happen to the house as a result of the divorce. 

Will my wife automatically get it even though we both own it? 

What usually happens in situations like this and what are my options? I don't really want to have to move out and give up the house.

Jane Denton of This is Money replies: 'No fault' divorce has made splitting up simpler and speedier since it was introduced a few years ago.

The most recent data shows that in 2023, the second full year following the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 which brought in the reforms, 74 per cent of divorces were processed under the regime.

Since peaking in 1993, divorce numbers have largely been on a downward trend - mostly because fewer people are getting married. 

Recent data from the Ministry of Justice's quarterly Family Court Statistics showed that between January and March 2025, 28,890 divorce applications were made under the no-fault divorce legislation, representing a fall of of 3 per cent from the same quarter last year. 

When people get divorced, figuring out what will happen to the family home is often one of the biggest financial decisions. It is also often fraught with emotion, and many families will need to downsize as a result of a divorce. 

There are no rules in place meaning your wife would automatically get the family house. In fact, there are several ways the house could be dealt with in the divorce. The needs of your son will be central to any decision. 

Taking one example, you and your wife could continue to own your family home after you get a divorce, with one of you moving out to live elsewhere. This could be an option given your son is still at school. 

Alternatively, a court could order a transfer of the family home if this is deemed to be necessary in your case. Other options are also available. 

I asked two legal experts for their thoughts on your case.  

James Riby, a partner at Charles Russell Speechlys, replies: Your wife will not automatically get the house.

The law says that a number of factors must be evaluated, including both of your financial needs and circumstances. The only factor given priority is the welfare of your son, as he is under 18.

The first step is working out what you and your wife's matrimonial assets are. 

Broadly speaking, this is anything you and your wife have acquired since the marriage began, or since cohabitation began, if you lived together before marriage. 

It does not matter whose name an asset is held in. 

Unless a pre or post-nuptial agreement says otherwise, the assumption is that these assets will be divided equally overall, and this will likely apply to your home given that you and your wife acquired it together. 

By contrast, assets which either of you had before marriage, or which you inherited, may be regarded as non-matrimonial assets and the assumption is that these should be retained by the person who had them or inherited them.

Judges can decide that non-matrimonial assets have become matrimonial and should therefore be shared equally if there appears to have been an intention to share them.

This is most likely when one party owned a home before marriage which is then used by both as the matrimonial home after marriage. In cases such as this, the judge usually decides the property has become matrimonial and should be shared equally, even if the party who moved in has contributed nothing financially to it.

Once the assets have been categorised in this way, the judge's second step is to check that everyone's financial needs are met, the most important need being for a home. 

The judge will regard each of you as needing a home as near as affordable in quality and location to the one you lived in during marriage and of at least two bedrooms so that your son can stay overnight with either of you. 

If the judge thinks that one of you would be unable to afford such a property using their equal share of the matrimonial assets plus non-matrimonial assets and mortgage capacity, then the judge will probably require the wealthier party to assist, by giving the less wealthy party somewhat more than half of the matrimonial assets and or by requiring the wealthier party to hand over some of their non-matrimonial assets. 

In cases where there isn't enough money and mortgage capacity to buy two homes, the solution may require one of you to rent or buy a smaller home, and that is likely to be the spouse who has historically undertaken less of the childcare burden of looking after your son.

Emma Spruce, a barrister at 4PB, says: I am sorry to hear that you are going through an extremely difficult time. 

I've advised many clients in similar situations to your own. Questions about the family home are always complex, as the property holds not only monetary value but also significant emotional ties for both yourselves and your children.

Your home will be considered by the court as a matrimonial asset, as it was the home you lived in as a family. 

The court has powers to make orders in relation to all of your assets, but will be particularly concerned with your home, which I presume is your primary asset, irrespective of how it is legally held. I note that you own it jointly, but this would be the case even if the house was held in only one of your names.

There is certainly no automatic presumption that the home should be transferred to your wife.

Each case is considered on its own facts and will most likely be driven by the needs of the members of your family, primarily your child, at least while he is a minor. There are a number of options you can consider. 

Agree to sell the house and divide the net proceeds in accordance with your respective needs. 

The starting point would usually be an equal split of proceeds, but there may be factors in your case that mean one party's needs necessitate a greater share of the proceeds. 

Alternatively, you could agree that your wife stays in the home on the basis that you receive an appropriate share of the capital so that you can meet your needs. 

You could agree to receive your share either by way of an offset against another asset, or by a lump-sum raised by your wife. You would need to transfer your interest in the home to your wife on receipt of your share in whichever form. 

Or, you could agree that your wife and son remain in the home on the basis that your share is realised by a deferred sale at a trigger point in the future, usually when a child has finished their education.

Specific legal advice tailored to your case will likely be necessary, but I would very much encourage you to try to find an agreeable solution with your wife at the earliest opportunity. 

If you cannot agree, there is recourse to the Family Court to make the determination for you. I hope that won't be necessary.