A prenuptial agreement is presumed to be valid and binding once signed. Canadian courts give significant weight to the principle that adults who negotiated and signed an agreement with independent legal advice should be held to it. But that presumption is not absolute. A court can set aside a prenup — in whole or in part — if any of the following grounds are established at trial.
1. Material Non-Disclosure
The single most common ground. If one spouse failed to disclose a significant asset, debt, or source of income at the time of signing, the agreement is vulnerable. The disadvantaged spouse can argue they would have negotiated different terms — or refused to sign altogether — had they known the full financial picture. Hidden offshore accounts, undisclosed business interests, and concealed real estate are the classic fact patterns.
2. Duress
If a spouse was forced, threatened, or pressured into signing, the agreement was not voluntary. The most common duress scenario in Canadian family law is the “eve-of-the-wedding” prenup — an agreement presented for signature days before the ceremony, when guests are arriving and deposits are non-refundable. Courts treat last-minute timing as strong circumstantial evidence of duress.
3. Undue Influence
A more subtle ground. Undue influence applies where one party held a position of power over the other — financial, emotional, cultural, or familial — that overrode the weaker party’s free will. The classic scenario involves a significant power imbalance combined with pressure from one spouse’s family or community.
4. Unconscionability
Where the terms of the agreement are so grossly unfair that no reasonable person properly advised would have signed it, a court can refuse to enforce it. This is a high bar — Canadian courts will not rewrite an agreement simply because the outcome turned out badly for one spouse. The unfairness must be apparent on the face of the agreement and present at the time of signing.
5. Lack of Independent Legal Advice
If one spouse signed without obtaining ILA, the agreement is significantly more vulnerable on every other ground. ILA is not a strict legal requirement in every province, but its absence is the single biggest factor courts cite when setting prenups aside. The presence of a properly executed ILA certificate is the strongest defence against a later challenge.
6. Significant Change in Circumstances (BC Specifically)
In British Columbia, section 93 of the Family Law Act gives courts discretion to set aside an agreement that has become “significantly unfair” between signing and separation — for example, where one spouse left a career to raise children and the agreement no longer reflects the relationship that actually unfolded. This is a uniquely broad provincial standard.
The Practical Takeaway
A prenup that satisfies the four core requirements in Section 4 — full disclosure, ILA, written and signed, voluntary — is, in practice, very difficult to set aside. The leading cases (Hartshorne, Miglin) confirm that Canadian courts will enforce a properly executed agreement even when the outcome later feels unfair. The risk of a successful challenge sits almost entirely with prenups that cut corners — DIY templates, single-lawyer files, eve-of-the-wedding signings, and incomplete financial disclosure.
If your prenup was drafted carefully, disclosed honestly, advised independently, and signed without pressure, it will hold.