http://www.farrer.co.uk/News/Briefings/The-Decision-of-the-Supreme-Court-in-Radmacher-v-Granatino/

Leading authority involving a German multi-millionaire. Basically, court will give weight to any agreement as long as it seems fair to them. Which in reality means they will do what they see as fair.

Quote: sootyj @ 3rd April 2014, 6:26 PM BST

Well first of all not everyone wants to combine their finances.

View original

I still don't see how you can avoid it in a long term relationship.

I very much value my financial independence, so any ideas welcomed.

Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 3rd April 2014, 4:02 PM BST

Woman: 'Did you see what the bridesmaid were wearing? So disgusting and tacky'.

Man: 'I saw that one with the big charlies'.

View original

So true!

Quote: Jennie @ 3rd April 2014, 6:33 PM BST

http://www.farrer.co.uk/News/Briefings/The-Decision-of-the-Supreme-Court-in-Radmacher-v-Granatino/

View original

Ah, thanks for that. This line cleared it up for me - 'no agreement between the parties to a marriage can oust the jurisdiction of the court, which has a statutory duty to determine the appropriate ancillary financial relief consequent upon a divorce'.

So judges are making the laws and not the law makers. That's bound to be a very fair precedent - corruption, personal bias, poor perception and misguided cognisance aside.

As for keeping money away from prying partners, that's a bit more difficult, as there is some form of electronic trail wherever you put your dough. I'd invent a pretend cash based gambling addiction and hide the money in the woods.

Quote: Ben @ 3rd April 2014, 6:36 PM BST

So true!

View original

When it comes to horny dudes, it's always the bridesmaid and never the bride.

Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 3rd April 2014, 6:47 PM BST

When it comes to horny dudes, it's always the bridesmaid and never the bride.

View original

Surely not!

http://www.contactmusic.com/pics/lf/russian_bride_wedding_dress_050212/russian-brides-revealing-wedding-dress-a-bride146s-startlingly_3714127.jpg

Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 3rd April 2014, 6:45 PM BST

So judges are making the laws and not the law makers. That's bound to be a very fair precedent - corruption, personal bias, poor perception and misguided cognisance aside.

View original

Family law is a very particular breed of law though. Every set of circumstances is completely unique. It doesn't lend itself well to broad brush dictats from on high.

Say you and I are getting divorced. We have a child, who I think would obviously be better off living with me. You think differently.

How can the government legislate for that situation? There are too many variables.

Quote: zooo @ 3rd April 2014, 6:49 PM BST

Surely not!

http://www.contactmusic.com/pics/lf/russian_bride_wedding_dress_050212/russian-brides-revealing-wedding-dress-a-bride146s-startlingly_3714127.jpg

View original

Quote: Jennie @ 3rd April 2014, 6:51 PM BST

Say you and I are getting divorced. We have a child.

View original

The only child to argue with itself in a court of law. I'd watch that.

Where is that sexual dynamo known as Tursiops?

Quote: zooo @ 3rd April 2014, 6:49 PM BST

Surely not!

http://www.contactmusic.com/pics/lf/russian_bride_wedding_dress_050212/russian-brides-revealing-wedding-dress-a-bride146s-startlingly_3714127.jpg

View original

Wearing white=virginity?!?!?

(I know, rarely applies now)

She has her knockers, no doubt.

Quote: Paul Wimsett @ 11th April 2014, 7:21 AM BST

She has her knockers, no doubt.

View original

I wouldn't have klicked on the link without your comment. Thanks, mate...oh, and thanks, zooo.

So, you're not a breast-man then?

EDIT: Hmmm...Breast-Man sounds lika a Marvel Comics superhero.

Quote: zooo @ 3rd April 2014, 6:49 PM BST

Surely not!

http://www.contactmusic.com/pics/lf/russian_bride_wedding_dress_050212/russian-brides-revealing-wedding-dress-a-bride146s-startlingly_3714127.jpg

View original

Oh my god! >_<

Where is Lee aka Leevil?!

Lee is taking a break from BCG.

Shall I ask where Cotter is, and answer my own question?