Divorce settlement

duchy

Legally as they have been married for eight years all assets are joint so if the OP went for what he was legally (if not morally) entitled to he could claim fifty percent of all equity as well as 50% of all savings etc.

Legal precedent would give him more than he wants to take from the relationship.

Ozzuk

duchy wrote: »

Legally as they have been married for eight years all assets are joint so if the OP went for what he was legally (if not morally) entitled to he could claim fifty percent of all equity as well as 50% of all savings etc.

Legal precedent would give him more than he wants to take from the relationship.

As you state legally can you back this up? I only ask because I've never seen a definition of a 'short marriage' - but I have seen references to one being anything up to 10 years. It seems to vary and rely on court judgement hence why I'm asking how you are so sure.

PeacefulWaters

There is no legal precedent.

Starting point is 50/50. But perfectly reasonable to vary based on £65k of initial equity, pension values accrued prior to cohabiting, inheritences etc.

Best to do this amicably without involving solicitors and judges and when that's achieved pay a solicitor to draw up a consent order and get it rubber stamped in court.

TBagpuss

Ozzuk wrote: »

As you state legally can you back this up? I only ask because I've never seen a definition of a 'short marriage' - but I have seen references to one being anything up to 10 years. It seems to vary and rely on court judgement hence why I'm asking how you are so sure.

There is not a set rule about what is considered to be a long or a short marriage. What the law says is that the Judge making a financial order must make an order which is fair and reasonable in all the circumstances.

There is then a non-exhaustive list of factors which may be relevant, which includes the ages of the parties and the length of the marraige (now generally the length of the relationship, including any cohabitation)

The starting point is an equal division of the assets but this is not an absolute entitlement.

One of the reasons why there are not fixed rules is that the different relvant factors will be given different weights depending on circumstances - for instance, a 5 year marraige may be seen as short, but the length of the marriage may not be of much relevance iof there are children.

It may be of more or less relevance depending on other factors - for example, if one spouse gives up a job to accommodate and support the other's career then even in a short marriage, it may be unfair simply to say 'take out what you put in'

Ozzuk

That's pretty much what I thought, its just when someone states something as legal it can give wrong idea (if it isn't).

I've been married twice, but the second time was a very short marriage (weeks!).

jackieblack

I was told that if the divorcing couple can come to an amicable agreement, the judge only has to be satisfied that it is not grossly unfair to either party (I understand there are broad guidelines as to what constitutes this), that neither party has been forced to agree under duress and that both parties have received legal advice on what they might be 'entitled' to (they are of course free to ignore this advice if they choose) .
The agreement the couple come to does not have to be the same as the judgment the judge would make.

PeacefulWaters

jackieblack wrote: »

I was told that if the divorcing couple can come to an amicable agreement, the judge only has to be satisfied that it is not grossly unfair to either party (I understand there are broad guidelines as to what constitutes this), that neither party has been forced to agree under duress and that both parties have received legal advice on what they might be 'entitled' to (they are of course free to ignore this advice if they choose) .
The agreement the couple come to does not have to be the same as the judgment the judge would make.

Pretty much what my legal advice told me.

gingercordial

Also when looking at "short marriages" the judge will normally take into account any time spent living together as a couple first, so whilst they may have been married 8 years if they lived together for 2 years first it would be counted as 10.