Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: The rewritten rules of marriage and divorce

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    21-04-04
    Location
    Originally from Taiwan
    Posts
    77


    Ethnic group
    Taiwanese
    Country: Netherlands



    The rewritten rules of marriage and divorce



    The rewritten rules of marriage and divorce

    By Frances Gibb, Legal Editor. The Times.
    May 25, 2006

    ALL couples were advised last night to sign prenuptial agreements before getting married after a landmark ruling that gives wives much bigger divorce settlements.

    Family lawyers said that wealthy young men and women would be better off not marrying at all after Britain’s highest court ruled that a wife may be entitled to half the assets created during even a short marriage.

    NI_MPU('middle');In the most important judgment on divorce for more than 20 years the law lords ruled that women who sacrifice careers to bring up children and look after the home should be compensated and may claim a share of their husband’s future income.

    Ruling on two test cases they said that Melissa Miller, 36, could keep the £5 million that she was awarded from the £17.5 million fortune of her husband Alan, 42, a City fund manager; and that Julia McFarlane, 46, was entitled to £250,000 a year from her husband Kenneth, 46, a tax specialist, for as long as she needs it.

    Emma Hatley, a partner at Withers, which advised Mrs Miller, said: “The ruling will serve as a deterrent to marriage. But prenuptial agreements will provide a good degree of protection — and I predict it will not be long before they are made binding. It’s not if, it’s when.”

    Jeremy Levison, Mr McFarlane’s lawyer, said he would advise wealthy young men not to marry. “It will have the effect of discouraging successful guys from getting married at all. You get these young women, in their thirties, the body clock starts ticking, and they are looking for someone to have their babies — then the marriage breaks up after a short while. I am already advising these kinds of men that they would be better off not marrying.”

    Failing that, he would urge prenuptial agreements. “My advice is: 1, don’t marry; 2, if you do make sure your other half is as wealthy as you are and 3, do a prenuptial agreement and keep your fingers crossed.”


    You can read the rest here.
    isa Republic of Taiwan

    Freedom for Taiwan

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    11-06-16
    Posts
    11


    Country: Canada



    It always favors women now.

  3. #3
    Regular Member last-resort's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-03-17
    Posts
    96

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b (R-L2)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2

    Ethnic group
    Hellenic
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Wang View Post
    The rewritten rules of marriage and divorce

    You can read the rest here.
    It seems that the British courts are as clueless as their offspring, the American courts, when it comes to economics. The Miller decision (assets) is less problematic than the McFarland decision (income). My beef with Miller is that one-half of the new assets is arbitrary. Certainly the person who created the wealth should be entitled to the larger share. And, since it doesn't involve pre-marriage assets, then the 'marriage stifle' effect should not be much.

    As to McFarland, we don't know what % the 250,000 pounds/year is of Mr. McFarland's income. If the issue is setting aside a career, then the economic cost of foregoing that career can be estimated, I suspect, pretty closely. One should factor in the average turnover rate (if Ms McFarland had been fired from that career job) and its impact on that career's income potential. Courts ought to be adult about such matters. For women in high income fields, the incentive to make the estimate is there. For lower income women, there can be averages by job title that could be available. From both one would subtract the lifestyle costs that the husband provided. So a wealthy man might do better marrying a waitress than a TV personality. In the US I think most jurisdictions recognize the higher earner as the one bearing the burden of dissolution - all things being equal. Therefore it could be the man that gets the income stream.

Similar Threads

  1. Marriage
    By smoke in forum Other Serious Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-02-14, 16:42
  2. Same sex marriage in the EU
    By Michael Folkesson in forum EU politics & government
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23-02-10, 19:20
  3. Belgian court rule that erotic online chat is ground for divorce
    By Maciamo in forum European News & Hot Topics
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 18-06-09, 12:34
  4. The Belgian identity : should Flanders divorce Wallonia ?
    By Maciamo in forum EU politics & government
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 15-12-06, 15:56
  5. Malaysia permits text message divorce
    By Maciamo in forum World News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-08-03, 18:54

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •