William and Kate – the prince, the princess and the prenups

Now that the speculation about a royal wedding is over, the speculation about a royal prenup begins.

Talk about marrying a "commoner". When Sweden celebrated its royal wedding this summer, they had to come to terms with the fact that their Crown Princess had chosen a former fitness instructor as her husband. King Carl XVI Gustaf was not impressed.

The situation was mitigated somewhat by the fact that Daniel Westling had agreed to the terms of a prenup, which guaranteed that in the event of a divorce, he would be awarded little more than he owned before they married.

Sweden's royal newly weds will not have jointly owned property. Inheritances, earnings, gifts and the princess's $2m stock portfolio will all remain separately owned. As a concession to romance, Prince Daniel might be allowed to keep the TV – only household items will be shared equally.

Prenups still seem a bit too un-British for many normal couples, let alone the royal family. Will Will and Kate be the first? There is no evidence that a British royal has ever signed a prenup before. And even if the supreme court – also that most British of institutions – has just taken a significant step to usher them into English law, there are many who still resist them. And, apart from the unavoidable tendencies towards royal divorce, aren't the royal family supposed to represent the sanctity of marriage as a union before God?

That aside, there are plenty of reasons why Will and Kate could be tempted to sign a prenup. Neither are likely to be complacent about money – with Kate's parents mere business millionaires, and the royals facing their own budget cuts. The Queen has agreed to cut her cut royal household spending by 14% in 2012 and is apparently draining her reserve fund at a rate which doesn't exactly accommodate an expensive wedding.

There are other reasons they might want to think about a prenup apart from money. The royals have learned hard lessons since the last heir to the throne got married – the prospect of another Martin Bashir type interview with a disillusioned princess no doubt strikes fear into the Queen's heart. A prenup would provide the perfect opportunity for privacy and confidentiality clauses that would keep royal business private.

And lawyers say that couples with personal experience of the reality of divorce are more likely to entertain the idea of a prenup. Princess Diana's private secretary, Patrick Jephson, was quick to summarise the point. "You've got be practical," Jephson said. "If [Middleton] was my sister, I'd tell her to get a good prenup."

One of the reasons that prenuptial agreements often seem in such bad taste is that they introduce questions of wealth and background at a time when all focus should really be on love and romance. But this is one wedding where there was no chance of that happening anyway. News reporters have been obsessed with Middleton's background, her parents' self-made mail-order business fortune, and the fact that her mother, shock horror, has been seen on camera chewing gum.

News reports of the wedding announcement all state matter-of-factly that Kate Middleton is in fact the first "commoner" to marry an heir to the throne since Anne Hyde married the future King James II in 1660. If that doesn't cut a reality check through the euphoria of a wedding announcement, I don't know what does.

(Published by Guardian - November 17, 2010)