It would actually constitute a Barder event, its the kind of situation you would need to seek counsel for, at the end of the day a judge would need to decide what should happen.
This did actually happen a couple of years ago and the surviving spouse made application to have the order sealed in the agreed terms, the judge refused, i would guess it would be sorted along the lines of what Hadenoughnow says.
It usually does say SUBJECT TO DECREE ABSOLUTE. The reason is that the order does not take effect until after DA.
So, as hadenoughnow correctly says, the parties are still technically married between the Decree Nisi and the decree Absolute. For this reason it is desirable that spouses in the throes of divorce should really make a new will straight away and not wait for the divorce to become final.
A provision in a will for a divorced wife is normally invalid, but that takes effect only after the absolute. Similarly, until the Absolute, the parties are still married and could in theory still benefit under an intestacy.
But really, the death of a spouse is such a fundamental change in circumstances that I think it would almost always be appropriate to have the order set aside, even perhaps after the absolute.
Otherwise any provision for the wife might devolve on some distant relative, unconnected with the divorce.
In the classic, and very tragic, case of Barder, the order had taken effect, and within a short time the ex wife, who benefited under the divorce, killed the children and committed suicide. The result would have been that the financial provision for the wife went to mother in law - not quite what was intended. The husband successfully applied for the order to be annulled. As a result the term '' Barder event '' came into being, meaning an event which radically changes the circumstances to the extent that it would be inappropriate to adhere to the terms of the original order.