Prenuptial Agreements

Legal_Academic

Miroslav wrote:

Just to ask a couple of questions I don't know the answer too...

Can pre-nups be challenged and if so, what success rate is their when challenged?

Yes, pre-nuptial agreements can certainly be challenged on a number of grounds, including undue influence, misrepresentation, lack of genuine consent, manifest unfairness to one party, failure of the weaker party to take proper independent legal advice, failure to disclose all assets, significant change of circumstances, poor drafting, failure to properly manage the process, etc.

This is a relatively new area of English law, since it used to be that the courts had little regard for them, and so case law is still developing. If you want an agreement that is likely to withstand the scrutiny of the courts, it mostly comes down to using a specialist firm that is experienced in this area who will manage the entire process. I could list several here or else feel free to contact me.

Provided pre-nuptial agreements are deemed 'fair and reasonable' then they are most likely to be upheld these days. I'm afraid I don't have any recent figures for agreements that have been successfully challenged, either partially or wholly (it is possible for an unfair clause to be struck out, leaving the remainder binding on the parties).

Miroslav

Thanks for that info.

It's a can of worms this marriage lark isn't it :rotfl:

november

Eyes_Wide_Open wrote:

If you think asking your poorer partner to sign a prenup sucks, that positively pales into insignificance compared to the behaviour of some people when they switch to monster mode in the divorce and start demanding half of everything.

Or as my ex husband did empty joint bank account, take all furniture and vanish with another woman leaving no forwarding.

I'm not going to comment any further but am dissapointed and rather annoyed that some posters feel free to make adverse comments on relationships involving pre-nups/where the couple think a pre-nup is a good idea, therefore by default on my relationship with my OH. I haven't and won't join in by commenting on my opinion of couples who don't make arrangements. As I've said, each to their own. Shame everyone doesn't believe that people do what suits them best and what they do isn't necessarily an indication of personality traits.

If my OH suggested reaching an agreement to start with to safeguard mine and my children's future I don't see how it is anyone else's place to judge whether or not I trust him enough to marry him.

Maybe I should go back to just looking for the best credit card deals - it seems less controversial. :rolleyes:

Miroslav

november wrote:

Or as my ex husband did empty joint bank account, take all furniture and vanish with another woman leaving no forwarding.

I'm not going to comment any further but am dissapointed and rather annoyed that some posters feel free to make adverse comments on relationships involving pre-nups/where the couple think a pre-nup is a good idea, therefore by default on my relationship with my OH. I haven't and won't join in by commenting on my opinion of couples who don't make arrangements. As I've said, each to their own. Shame everyone doesn't believe that people do what suits them best and what they do isn't necessarily an indication of personality traits.

If my OH suggested reaching an agreement to start with to safeguard mine and my children's future I don't see how it is anyone else's place to judge whether or not I trust him enough to marry him.

Maybe I should go back to just looking for the best credit card deals - it seems less controversial. :rolleyes:

If it works for you, fair enough. As long as both partners are happy with it, I don't see the problem. It's when only 1 of the 2 agree, then the problems arrive.

It just seems to me that there is little point in marriage these days. The piece of paper you get when you say 'I do' is nothing more than a contract that if you 'break' is going to cost you a helluva lot, as you have discovered with your ex-husband, unfortunately.

But, this is the modern day, who can you trust in todays society

margaretclare

november wrote:

Or as my ex husband did empty joint bank account, take all furniture and vanish with another woman leaving no forwarding.

Well, that was similar to what my present husband did, leaving out the bit about furniture - he arrived on my doorstep with his old car, his computer, his desk and chair, his clothes in bin-bags, his tool-kit and £600 which was all there was in the joint account. He drove 170 miles to be with me. As he was the only one who ever put any money into the account, he felt justified in taking it out.

He didn't reveal his address for several weeks - I sometimes wish he'd kept it that way, might have been simpler, might have avoided all those lies wifey felt able to tell about him.

Aunty Margaret

november

margaretclare wrote:

november wrote:

Or as my ex husband did empty joint bank account, take all furniture and vanish with another woman leaving no forwarding.

Well, that was similar to what my present husband did, leaving out the bit about furniture

I don't think it was margaretclare.

Firstly the joint bank account was the only one we had and I worked too, secondly he did take the furniture, and thirdly he took the car which was fine as it was his but he also took my motorbikes which wasn't as they were mine. He basically took everything when I was absent and left me without so much as a bed nor any money to buy one with.

And it might be different when you aren't the one left but I didn't think what my ex did was right then and I don't now. Incidentally he told his new partner (and wife to be) that I'd left him plus various other things. He lied. I have never had an address for him and, quite frankly, I don't want one.

margaretclare

Hi, no, you're right, it was different. B took only what he felt was 'his', and believe it or not, during the divorce she even demanded his car which was a 15-year old rust-bucket, and his obsolete computer!! Also, she didn't work, took more than she ever gave and he'd just had enough of her demands, her tempers, her frigidity, her violence towards him. He left simply because he couldn't take any more.

I wanted to go and see her and tell her what was happening. He couldn't face the idea - although he's a strong positive man, that was what she'd reduced him to. So he left after taking her to college (floristry, a 2-year course that was lasting 4 years).

Aunty Margaret

BWZN93

Spendless wrote:

Unless the female has gone thru the menopuse, or either of you have been sterilised or have a fertility problem that you are aware of how would you know that the marriage would be childless? And surely no-one knows in advance that their marriage is going to be short-lived?

So to me what's being said is
get a pre-nuptial in the event this marriage is childless and short-lived but in the event that it isn't then there was no point in getting the pre-nuptial.

Arent scouts, brownies, army cadets etc taught to be prepared?? It's a 'just in case' measure, and I would certainly want to protect myself in the event I made the mistake of marrying a person and it turned out to be short lived.

We simply dont know whats going to happen in the future, as you have already said, but then again, we do a lot of things to protect ourselves against the unexpected, which is exactly the purpose of contracts, insurance, and many laws - its for our own protection.

Jo xx

Highland_Doll

Pre-Nuptual Agreements are yet another uselsss, unwanted, un-needed thing we have copied from America. I have been married 18 years and my husband and I got married 'till death do us part' I am damn sure that is what it said in the wedding vows (long time ago now :rotfl: ) so tell me people, why do you all bother getting married if you don't intend it to be 'forever'???? What's the point???

In my opinion, you get married for LIFE and if one partner decides to break that vow, they deserve to lose half of everything. Correct me if I am wrong, but when you get married, you are supposed to share everything, build everything together and spend your LIFE together. So, it seems to me that everything BELONGS to BOTH of you TOGETHER! 50/50 split.

Pre-Nups are a joke, offensive and if ever I was asked to sign one I'd say 'Go To Hell' etc. and the marriage would be off as it would be a clear sign to me that the person doing the asking was already planning on a divorce and so wouldn't be worth marrying in the first place.

It doesn't matter who brings what to a marriage, when you join in this union, everything belongs to you both, no matter where it came from, who earned it, etc.

In history, a man went out to work and provided for his family, a woman stayed at home. A man was prepared to provide for his family and a woman was expected to depend on that man. In my opinion, that still stands today. If my husband ran out on me, I wouldn't just take half of everything, I'd take the lot as he would have let me down. I don't work as my husband insisted I don't from the day we married...he believes it is a man's place to provide for his wife and family. He is well insured, all money get's dealt with by me and he ensures I am financially secure. But maybe that's why my marriage is still going strong after 18 years? We both are married till death-do-us-part as we should be. If he let me down, boy would he suffer and he would deserve to. Just like if I let him down etc....it's not one rule for one in our life. We both are commited to it.

Reading this thread, which is most sad, I can see why so many marriages end in divorce in this country. Pre-Nups? The marriage is over before it started if you ask me.

Just my opinion.

Faith_2

nearlyrich wrote:

I think too many people care far too much about money and possessions these days and I wonder if they really understand what love and marriage are all about. When you read about "celebrities" and royalty stressing about inheritances and alimony you realise that it really doesn't make you happy.

I haven't read all the threads (I have to go to work so haven't got time sorry!) so I apologize if anyone has mentioned this point already. It seems that in this thread pre-nups are being considered from the point of view of first marriages and/ or second marriages without any children. I have been married. I am now divorced. I have a daughter. My plan is that my daughter will inherit whatever I own. Nobody else! For me, a pre-nup agreement would be a way of ensuring my daughter doesn't lose what is rightfully hers. Yes it is about money, but it's not always bad that it should be about money - otherwise why would you access this website????

But with some of the silly laws in this country, I think the safest choice is to remain single!