United Kingdom is called ' century case ' divorce judgment _BBC perspective on UK

Hello, I'm the BBC's network of the English essay "column of the authors suping. Couple this with the respective linniao, flee. Before marriage is ugly words in front of the Church or faith time? at the beginning of July, London Court of Appeal judgment made a milestone: in divorce cases, pre-marital agreement in determining property, you can play the role of the "decisive". The Court recognized the Germany women rich Catherine · Rademacher (KatrinRadmacher) and ex-husband Nicholas · Granat Gatineau (Nicolas Granatino) valid premarital agreement, Catherine, a lot of breaking up. According to the laws of England and Wales, pre-marital agreement has no legal restraint, divorce case judge discretion. This and the United States, the European neighbouring countries, and Australia. Therefore, London enjoy long-term capital of "divorce" in the title of both the numerous "qinxianglian" fight for the rights and interests, also attracted by divorce predatory Argonaut. Now, this is referred to as the "century" divorce judgment whether prenuptial agreement bright green? "divorce capital of" myth is beginning to burst? who would dare to claim that today's pillow people coming what will become the "century" Catherine was born in Germany, a very rich family, the value is estimated as high as 100 million pounds, is Europe's richest woman in the world. She and France's Nicolas joined in love in London. At that time, the same was born with a silver spoon of Nicolas at JP Morgan for bank investment House, the annual salary of £ 30 million. The two married in the first four months in Germany signed an agreement that committed if you break up, does not raise any money to each other. Premarital Agreement makes me confident that Nicolas marry me because he love him as I do love me, we were married for the right reasons. Catherine · Rademacher eight years later, there are two children, this marriage came to an end. Vows are thrown to the brain, not to mention a paper agreement? Nicolas believe that marriage in the United Kingdom, in the divorce capital of divorce, the Court, the judge must not be considered prenuptial agreement. Last July, United Kingdom High Court judge is determined taking into account the disparity between the economic strength (Nicolas has been diverted to a doctorate at Oxford, engage in scholarly research, the annual salary of only thirty pounds, and in debt), Jean Nicolas to adhere to the pre-marital agreement "is clearly not fair", therefore, liable to Catherine one-time payments Nicolas 580 million pounds. On Nicholas "breach" extreme anger Catherine appeal. 2 July, the Court of Appeal recognized marriage conventions effectively, Catherine to Nicolas one-time payments of £ 100 million, in addition to his purchase of a value of 250 million pounds of residence, but in the youngest child reaches the age of 22 years old must be returned to Catherine. Nicolas 70 million of debt repaid by Catherine is responsible. "Marriage is no longer sacred" Catherine won screamed, "this is a great victory of love", but the legal profession more concerned about the case for United Kingdom impact of the Divorce Act. Catherine · Rademacher is Europe's richest woman one of Catherine's lawyers said that the sentence "so that you can start to catch up with the marriage law of the United Kingdom and other countries, as of today, any adult to life in the most beautiful moment for the worst moment ready." Thorpe said in judgment justice, continues to ignore Premarital Agreement "is increasingly unrealistic," because, in the view of the "representative is a legal and moral values," and does not apply to "marriage is no longer sacred, divorce is generally" status. The legal community generally felt that the decision marks the position of the United Kingdom the divorce court has been noticeably changes, pre-marital agreement "in fact has legalized". There is a precedent for future similar cases will reference. This will give Parliament greater pressure, changes in the law, expressly conferred premarital agreement of legal status. However, the industry is concerned, there is a legal agreement before marriage, divorce, the Court will be more difficult to protect the vulnerable party. "' New London defence", the old expensive such as clouds, believe that century big case left many famous party but for a long time did not dare to marry Nouveau long sigh. Premarital Agreement history United Kingdom Court does not accept premarital agreement with 150 years of history, the starting point is to marry the two sides should life together. Before 1850, the United Kingdom and female premarital property agreement signed by the practice is widespread, the civil court have no right to interfere. At that time, the wife of a marriage, you must set the property to the husband. The woman's family will be asked to sign in premarital property agreement, ensuring their annexation by man. In fact, observers have noted that over the past few years, premarital agreement has become increasingly common. Last year, the former Beatles Member Paul · McCartney divorce case to many knocks on the alarm. Because hate Premarital Agreement "romantic", McCartney, indomitable and Mills received a marriage certificate. Four years later, the couple became the enemy, McCartney, not only the family suffered, was forced to endure high court hearing, the marriage of details, privacy is out puliao embarrassment. Ordinary people are also concerned that, once the marriage breakdown will lose "half", especially those on income, property status differences larger partners. In addition, legal company notes, NUP on "marriage" more attractive. Because these people are usually weak thicker, have an adult child will urge parent/parent remarriage signed property agreement, defend the family left to their own inheritance. From Catherine and Nicolas appeal judgement discussed on the Internet is not difficult to see, on the understanding of premarital agreement than to understand, accept more than hate. While the support agreement signed before marriage, most of them also supports legalizing. A reader of flatly wrote: "if I were a millionaire, will certainly consider signing prenuptial agreement, shidao variation, not checked, sure to suffer." Another reader said, "the contract is a contract that must be complied with, now divorced so popular, not to contribute to the accumulation of property of a party to the divorce took half of ' unfair." McCartney and Mills marriage case four years there are readers even suggested that the law should provide premarital agreement must be married. As the cornerstone of the emotional relationship is honest, both sides must face the reality of divorce may in future. Moreover, consultations from the marriage, or you can see each other's personality and motivation. But alsoThere are a few readers think, century Grand case is the United Kingdom legal history "sad day" premarital agreement should not be more important than the marriage vow! church leaders and family organization pressure that judgment would make it easier to divorce, marriage more worthless. Anglican spokesperson said that vows should be permanent commitment, signed an agreement and look forward to the marriage, suggesting that both sides have reservations about the before marriage, trust limited. Ugly words in front of United Kingdom legislation, the Commission is currently reviewing premarital agreement status, results are expected in 2012. General forecast, by then, the Legislative Committee will draw up a draft law modifying submitted to Parliament. Starting today, adults can life beautiful moment for the worst moment. Catherine · Rademacher lawyers may just a few years, the United Kingdom and the United States will recognize the prenuptial agreement as legally binding? today pillow people what later would become, who dare to assert that the marriage as a not for profit enterprises "," sign agreement isn't equal to drive belts, not as an accident, for insurance? however, question the other's marriage from motives start aren't buried down in the future? you on this? do you agree with premarital agreement or property public notary? welcome comment threads.