Child maintenance has a calculator. You put in the paying parent's income and the number of children, and a number comes out.

Spousal maintenance has nothing of the kind. No formula, no table, no percentage of income. Two couples with identical finances can end up with wildly different outcomes, and both can be correct in law.

That is not a flaw in the system. It is the system. And understanding why is the difference between negotiating from a position of knowledge and negotiating from a position of hope.

What spousal maintenance actually is

The legal name is a periodical payments order, and the power comes from section 23(1)(a) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. The wording is as open as it looks:

"an order that either party to the marriage shall make to the other such periodical payments, for such term, as may be specified in the order"

Such payments. Such term. The Act does not say how much, and it does not say how long. Both are left to the judge, guided by the section 25 factors, which cover income, earning capacity, needs, the standard of living during the marriage, the length of the marriage, contributions, and the ages of the parties.

This is a different thing entirely from child maintenance, which is calculated by the Child Maintenance Service to a published formula and does not involve a judge at all in most cases. The two are separate, and a settlement can include one without the other.

The court has a duty to try to end it

Here is the part most people do not know, and it changes the whole shape of the conversation.

Section 25A(1) imposes a positive duty. Where the court decides to make a financial order in favour of a spouse, "it shall be the duty of the court to consider whether it would be appropriate so to exercise those powers that the financial obligations of each party towards the other will be terminated as soon after the making of the order as the court considers just and reasonable".

That is the clean break principle, and it is written into the statute rather than invented by judges. The starting question is not "how much maintenance, for how long". It is "can this be finished".

Section 25A(2) then goes further. If the court does order periodical payments, it must "in particular consider" whether to limit them to a term "sufficient to enable the party in whose favour the order is made to adjust without undue hardship to the termination of his or her financial dependence on the other party".

Read that phrase carefully: adjust without undue hardship. The purpose of a term order is not to maintain somebody indefinitely at the marital standard of living. It is to give them time to stop needing the money. A court is being asked how long that adjustment reasonably takes.

And section 25A(3) gives the court the power to refuse maintenance outright and slam the door behind it: if it considers that no continuing obligation should be imposed, it may dismiss the application with a direction that the applicant may not apply again for such an order in relation to that marriage.

Three shapes an order can take

In practice, financial settlements fall into one of three patterns.

A clean break. No maintenance at all. Assets are divided, often with the lower earner receiving a larger share of the capital to compensate, and neither party can come back for income later. Most short and medium marriages without young children end here.

A term order. Maintenance for a defined period: five years, or until the youngest child finishes primary school, or until a professional requalification is complete. The term is doing a job, and the job is the adjustment in section 25A(2).

A joint lives order. Maintenance until one of them dies, the recipient remarries, or the order is varied. These have become considerably less common and are now generally reserved for long marriages where the lower earner's earning capacity was genuinely extinguished, often by decades out of work raising children, at an age where rebuilding it is not realistic.

If somebody tells you joint lives maintenance is the default, they are describing the law as it was understood a generation ago.

The hard limits the statute does impose

The Act is vague about amount and duration. It is precise about two things that end payments automatically.

Under section 28(1)(a), the term of a periodical payments order cannot extend beyond the death of either party, nor beyond the remarriage of, or formation of a civil partnership by, the person receiving the payments.

So remarriage ends spousal maintenance. Not reduces it, not opens it to review: ends it, by operation of law, with only arrears already due surviving. This catches people out badly, and it is the reason some recipients of maintenance live with a new partner for years without marrying. Cohabitation, by contrast, does not automatically end an order. It is a ground to apply to vary one, which is a different and much less certain thing.

The other precise power is section 28(1A). When the court makes a term order, it may direct that the recipient "shall not be entitled to apply under section 31 below for the extension of the term". With that direction, the term is final. Without it, the recipient can apply before the term expires to have it extended, and a surprising number do.

Whether your order carries a section 28(1A) bar is one of the most consequential details in the whole document, and it is one sentence long.

Maintenance orders are variable, which cuts both ways

Section 31 gives the court power to vary, discharge or suspend a periodical payments order. That applies to both directions.

If the payer loses their job or their income falls, they can apply to reduce payments. If the recipient's circumstances worsen, or the payer's income rises substantially, the recipient can apply to increase them. Either party can apply to capitalise, which converts the remaining income stream into a lump sum and achieves a clean break after the fact.

The practical consequence is that a maintenance order is not settled. It is a relationship that continues, with the ex-spouse's finances remaining relevant to yours for as long as it runs. For a lot of people, that is the strongest argument for taking less capital now in exchange for never having to do this again.

What this means for how you negotiate

A few things follow from the law as it actually stands.

The question is needs, not entitlement. There is no share of your ex's income that is yours. There is a sum a court might consider necessary to meet reasonable needs during a period of adjustment. Framing it as entitlement makes negotiations worse and tends to produce worse outcomes.

Evidence of adjustment matters. If you are seeking maintenance, the case is strongest where you can show what the adjustment period is for: a course with an end date, a child starting school, a return to a career with a realistic timeline. "I need support indefinitely" invites section 25A(1).

Capital and income are tradeable. A larger share of the equity in the house in exchange for no maintenance is a very common structure, and it delivers the clean break the statute prefers. Our guide to who gets the house in a UK divorce explains how the home gets treated, and how pensions are split covers the asset people most often forget to count.

Get the order drafted properly. Whether there is a section 28(1A) bar, whether the term is index linked, what triggers a review, and what happens on cohabitation are all drafting decisions. They are also the things people discover years later, at the worst possible moment.

Frequently asked questions

Is there a formula for spousal maintenance in the UK?

No. Section 23(1)(a) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 allows "such periodical payments, for such term, as may be specified in the order", and the amount is decided by reference to the section 25 factors. Unlike child maintenance, there is no calculator and no percentage.

How long does spousal maintenance last?

For as long as the order says. Section 25A(2) requires the court to consider limiting it to a term long enough for the recipient to "adjust without undue hardship" to being financially independent. Term orders of a few years are now far more common than orders lasting for life.

Does spousal maintenance stop if I remarry?

Yes, automatically, if you are the one receiving it. Section 28(1)(a) provides that the term cannot extend beyond the remarriage of, or formation of a civil partnership by, the recipient. Only arrears already due survive.

What if my ex moves in with a new partner?

Cohabitation does not end the order by itself. It is a ground on which the paying party can apply under section 31 to vary or discharge it, and the outcome depends on the facts rather than being automatic.

What is a clean break?

A settlement with no ongoing maintenance between the spouses, so neither can claim income from the other in future. Section 25A(1) places a duty on the court to consider whether it can achieve one, which is why it is the starting point rather than an unusual outcome.

Can spousal maintenance be increased later?

Yes, if the order is a live periodical payments order and there is no bar preventing an application. Section 31 allows variation in either direction. Where a term order carries a section 28(1A) direction, the term itself cannot be extended.

Is spousal maintenance the same as child maintenance?

No. Child maintenance is for the children, calculated to a formula, and usually handled by the Child Maintenance Service. Spousal maintenance is for the former spouse, has no formula, and is ordered by the court. A settlement can contain either, both or neither.

Where a coach fits in

Nothing above is legal advice, and a coach does not give it. What a coach does is make the conversation with your solicitor a shorter and better one.

The capital versus income trade is a decision about what kind of life you want and what level of ongoing contact with your ex you can live with. That is not a legal question, and solicitors are not the right people to help you answer it. Working out what you actually need, what you are prepared to give up to be finished, and how to hold a position under pressure is coaching work.

If that is where you are, book a free call and we will talk it through. What a divorce coach does sets out the role in more detail, and separation coach, divorce coach, counsellor or mediator explains who to see for what.

The full text of the Act is on legislation.gov.uk, and sections 23, 25A, 28 and 31 are the four worth reading before any meeting about money.