Under Chilean Civil Law, there is no obligation for one spouse to pay social security contributions on behalf of the other. Each former spouse is individually responsible for their own social security contributions, in accordance with their respective employment and pension status. 

Following divorce, former spouses are no longer required to support or assist each other in all aspects of life, as is required during marriage (pursuant to Article 131 of the Civil Code). Each party becomes solely responsible for their own maintenance and welfare. There are, however, two exceptions to this: 

• Alimony: The spouse who was not at fault for the divorce may be entitled to receive alimony from the other, in accordance with the general rules (Article 174 of the Civil Code). In certain cases, alimony may include the payment of social security contributions if so ordered by the court, taking into account the needs of the recipient and the financial capacity of the payer. However, this is not automatic or general; it must be specifically requested and substantiated in court. 

• Economic compensation: If one spouse suffers a significant economic disadvantage as a result of taking primary responsibility for the care of any children or to household duties during the marriage, they may request economic compensation at the time of divorce. This compensation may be agreed upon in the form of money or other assets, but it does not entail the payment of future social security contributions. Its purpose is to address the financial imbalance resulting from the marriage and its dissolution. 

In Colombia, the only scenario in which a spouse may be entitled to their partner’s pension is in the case of a survivor’s pension. The survivor’s pension is an economic benefit under the pension system granted to the family members of a deceased contributor or pensioner, with the aim of ensuring financial support. Importantly, divorce results in the surviving ex-spouse losing the right to claim the survivor’s pension that they might otherwise have received from their former spouse. Exceptions include where there has been a separation of assets, legal/de facto separation, or liquidation of the marital partnership, but the marital bond remains intact, and they can prove no less than five years of cohabitation with the deceased spouse before their passing. If the beneficiary is over 30 years old at the time of the contributor’s death, the survivor’s pension will be granted for life; if under 30, the pension will be granted on a temporary basis.  

Finally, and in the case of successive relationships, if there is a divorce from the spouse and no cohabitation with them, and there is a permanent partner who meets the requirement of five years of continuous cohabitation prior to the pensioner’s death, the entire pension entitlement shall be granted to the permanent partner. 

In Croatia, the approach to pension sharing on divorce differs from the UK system. The Croatian legal framework does not recognise pension sharing as a distinct legal mechanism. Instead, pensions may be treated as part of the matrimonial property, which is divided as a whole (either during or after divorce) in a separate dedicated process, assuming specific conditions are met.  

As a rule, matrimonial property is divided equally (50/50) between the spouses, regardless of individual contributions, unless they have agreed otherwise. Under Croatian law, matrimonial property includes assets acquired through work during the marital union (which may not coincide with the full legal duration of the marriage) or assets derived from such work. Accordingly, pensions from the first, mandatory pillar (i.e. the state pension based on pay-as-you-go contributions) would not be considered matrimonial property. These pensions are not viewed as assets earned through work, but rather as a set of personal social security rights arising from compulsory pension insurance. In contrast, pensions from the second and third pillars (voluntary and supplementary pension schemes), which function as private savings mechanisms, are considered matrimonial property, as such contributions made during the marital union effectively increase the value of a spouse’s future pension and are treated similarly to wages or other income earned through work. 

In Denmark, the treatment of pensions on divorce is based on an individualistic approach. Generally, pensions in Denmark are not part of the marital property unless explicitly agreed. This means that each spouse retains their own pension savings upon divorce unless the courts (in exceptional situations) find it unreasonable, e.g. where one spouse has foregone pension savings due to childcare or part-time work. In such cases, the courts may award a compensatory amount, but this is the exception rather than the rule.  

Although Denmark is characterised by an employment rate for women that is only slightly lower than the employment rate for men (the difference is approximately 5%), said approach – while simple in structure – has drawn criticism for reinforcing the gender pension gap, particularly where one spouse (typically the woman) has accrued significantly less pension due to the traditional division of roles during marriage. Thus, women in the Danish labour market earn an average of approximately 12% less than men. Prenuptial agreements with pension sharing clauses are increasingly promoted as a tool to protect the financially weaker spouse, especially in cases where one party suspends or reduces their labour market participation due to childcare responsibilities. 

In general, any initiative to equalisation is to be taken by spouses voluntarily, either beforehand or as part of the divorce process, or by involving the courts during the divorce process.  

Under German law, namely the Pension Equalisation Act (Versorgungsausgleichsgesetz), pension sharing forms part of the wider divorce settlement process. The default method for sharing occupational/workplace pensions is referred to as “internal split”. Through this, the ex-spouse eligible for compensation is granted their own entitlement under the existing pension scheme of the other ex-spouse, whose own entitlement is reduced accordingly. For the employer, this usually creates an additional administrative burden, especially if the pension scheme is operated by the employer itself and not administrated through an external pension provider (e.g. an insurance company or pension fund).  

An alternative process also exists in Germany, referred to as “external split”, whereby the pension credit awarded to the ex-spouse is transferred to an external provider. This can relieve the employer from additional future administrative responsibilities. However, and except for pension amounts that fall below a certain threshold, an external split requires the ex-spouse’s consent.  

For employers that operate their own occupational pension scheme, a ruling by the German Federal Labour Court helpfully offers some legal certainty. Once a final decision has been issued by the family court on pension sharing, this is binding for the provider of an occupational pension and cannot be challenged. So, once the employer has properly implemented the family court’s decision, they do not need to worry about having to do it all over again. 

Under Greek law, pension benefits are excluded from the division of marital property upon divorce. This framework contrasts markedly with the approach in the United Kingdom.  

However, there is an exception that allows a divorced spouse to claim the pension of a deceased former spouse, provided certain strict conditions are met. These conditions require that the deceased was legally required to pay maintenance to the divorced spouse, the marriage lasted at least ten years until it officially ended, the divorced spouse was not at fault for the divorce, the divorced spouse’s average monthly taxable income does not exceed EUR 800, and  both parties (the deceased, before their passing, and the divorced spouse) have not remarried or entered into a registered civil partnership.  

This approach ensures that pension rights are preserved in cases where there was a significant marital commitment and genuine financial need posthumously.  

Hungary currently has a mandatory state pension system. In the event of a divorce, spouses cannot split their pensions because pensions are not considered joint property. Each person is entitled to their own pension. 

 However, if spouses entered into a voluntary pension contract in addition to the compulsory state pension scheme and paid contributions during this period, the value of the contract is considered joint property and must be considered when dividing assets. 

Since 1 May 1995, pension sharing in the Netherlands has been governed by the Equalisation of Pension Rights in the Event of Divorce Act (“WVPS”), which provides that an old-age pension accrued during a marriage or registered partnership is divided equally (50/50) upon separation, unless the ex-partners agree otherwise. The pension provider pays the equalised portion directly to the ex-partner if notified of the divorce within two years, but this portion is tied to the payment of the participant’s pension and affected by their choices (e.g. whether they decide to retire early or defer retirement). The WVPS does not apply to separations before May 1995 or to unmarried cohabitants. However, under the Dutch Pensions Act, ex-partners – including unmarried partners – may be entitled to survivor’s pension accrued up to the date of separation. As an alternative to equalisation, the WVPS also offers the option of conversion, granting the ex-partner an independent entitlement, unaffected by the participant’s decisions or death. If the divorce is not reported to the pension provider within two years, ex-partners must arrange the division themselves, often leading to legal and practical complications. 

A recent evaluation of the WVPS found that it is still little known by citizens and divorce professionals and therefore underused. Because action is required by individuals (e.g. notifying the pension provider within two years), many fail to benefit from the law. Parallels can be drawn in this respect with the current UK framework, with uptake in pension sharing often low. Unlike the UK however, where there is no indication of a change to the law on pension sharing on divorce, a legislative proposal has been advanced in the Netherlands. This would introduce an automatic 50/50 division based on government divorce records and make conversion the default. The legislation aims to reduce the burden on ex-partners and prevent complications as a result of missed notifications. The proposal is currently dormant, but expected to take effect on 1 January 2028. 

There is no legal procedure in Ukraine for dividing a pension after divorce.    

During the marriage, the pension acquired is treated as the joint property of the spouses. In the event of divorce, the spouses may divide the pension only if it is a joint monetary savings account. Otherwise, each party continues to receive their pension independently of the other, regardless of the amount, and has no obligation to pay a percentage amount to the other party. This is due to the fact that a pension is a person’s income and after the divorce, the rules of jointly acquired property do not apply to it. 

Ukrainian legislation does, however, provide for the deduction of a pension to one spouse in the event of the other’s death. This is called a survivor’s pension and it is provided to spouses who are disabled in the amount of 50% of the deceased person’s pension. The surviving spouse may receive the pension as long as they are unable to work or for the rest of their life if they have reached retirement age.