Pre-nups given legal recognition in the UK at last

A long time coming for those in the UK who through working hard may have built up large assets before meeting their partner...

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-...ng-2111582.html

 

 

This decision means pre-nups are binding as long as they are fair.

 

 

"Everybody hopes their marriage will last a lifetime. From today we are allowed to prepare for the possibility that it might not be the case.

 

 

"Pre-nups are like a form of fire insurance - better taken out before the event rather than after it.

 

 

"Couples can now decide in the best of times what the outcome would be in the worst of times.

"This decision means pre-nups are binding as long as they are fair."

 

Boy that's rather subjective. The decision opens doors yes, but it leaves too many loopholes. Who determines what's "fair"?

"This decision means pre-nups are binding as long as they are fair."

 

Boy that's rather subjective. The decision opens doors yes, but it leaves too many loopholes. Who determines what's "fair"?

 

Provision for children. Same for wills in the UK. If I wanted to leave all my assets to Spearmint Rhino, it'd be challenged as it's not 'fair' for my dependents.

 

Whilst I'm alive, I can still go and spend it all at Sant #### or Stuttgart however, should the compulsion arise ......

Provision for children. Same for wills in the UK. If I wanted to leave all my assets to Spearmint Rhino, it'd be challenged as it's not 'fair' for my dependents.

 

Whilst I'm alive, I can still go and spend it all at Sant #### or Stuttgart however, should the compulsion arise ......

 

What if I haven't spoken to my dependents for years? Why in God's name am I OBLIGATED to leave them money? It's MY money, why can't I leave it to Spearmint Rhino? The government is fostering the sense of entitlement that many of today's youth posess.

What if I haven't spoken to my dependents for years? Why in God's name am I OBLIGATED to leave them money? It's MY money, why can't I leave it to Spearmint Rhino? The government is fostering the sense of entitlement that many of today's youth posess.

 

I highly doubt it would be the same for estranged ones as it is for actual dependents.

 

I highly doubt it would be the same for estranged ones as it is for actual dependents.

 

One would only hope, yet the added word "fair" in the decision just leaves it open

What if I haven't spoken to my dependents for years? Why in God's name am I OBLIGATED to leave them money? It's MY money, why can't I leave it to Spearmint Rhino? The government is fostering the sense of entitlement that many of today's youth posess.

 

With marrages you should get out what you put in, not what a judge decides is fair because they feel sorry for you because you have to go back to the poor lifestyle you had before you met. Can't understand the obssecion governments seem to have with shifting personal responsibility for looking after yourself to someone else, whether it be the state or partner it's just plain wrong. Same with children settlements of outragous amounts of money to "just live" after a divorce, kind of glad i'm not married or have kids because of stuff like this.

 

At least this decision is a start though.

Interesting to note that this case was resolved around a woman protecting her assets.......males can temporarily rejoice, but in the long run women will be the beneficiaries. I say this because of a demographic trend happening today(in the US, possibly Europe as well); there are more females enrolled in higer education than males, this applies to grad schools, law and medicine as well. In 20 years these female grads will be dominating their fields of expertise, accumulating wealth, branching out into politics, the judiciary, controlling the levers of power at all levels. Many will be the top earners in the family. When this happens, don't be surprised if family law gets revised, making it easier for a woman to kick her man to the curb, flat assed broke.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting to note that this case was resolved around a woman protecting her assets.......males can temporarily rejoice, but in the long run women will be the beneficiaries. I say this because of a demographic trend happening today(in the US, possibly Europe as well); there are more females enrolled in higer education than males, this applies to grad schools, law and medicine as well. In 20 years these female grads will be dominating their fields of expertise, accumulating wealth, branching out into politics, the judiciary, controlling the levers of power at all levels. Many will be the top earners in the family. When this happens, don't be surprised if family law gets revised, making it easier for a woman to kick her man to the curb, flat assed broke.

Then if roles were reversed and the man wanted to kick his wife out flat broke he looks like a bad guy. Double standards

With marrages you should get out what you put in, not what a judge decides is fair because they feel sorry for you because you have to go back to the poor lifestyle you had before you met.

 

My sentiments exactly!

With marrages you should get out what you put in, not what a judge decides is fair because they feel sorry for you because you have to go back to the poor lifestyle you had before you met. Can't understand the obssecion governments seem to have with shifting personal responsibility for looking after yourself to someone else, whether it be the state or partner it's just plain wrong. Same with children settlements of outragous amounts of money to "just live" after a divorce, kind of glad i'm not married or have kids because of stuff like this.

 

At least this decision is a start though.

 

She wouldn't be getting the Lambo...