In the ore of fattening, the Court considered the validity of a pre-eminent contract. The evidence showed that the complainant`s agreement was presented within two days: if two people live together and are considered a common law, both parties should have a clear understanding of the expectations of money and children if the relationship were to end. An agreement defining decisions will prevent legal issues from being separated. 37 (2) An agreement under subsection 1 may be reached by two (2) persons who care for each other in contemplating their marriage, but are not enforceable until after the marriage. Traditionally, the stages of conclude these agreements differ from those of separation agreements. For reasons that include the stigma and embarrassment that are often associated with these agreements, there are certainly shortcuts that are taken towards the conclusion. The agreement is, as it were, “the elephant in the chapel.” In the couple`s eyes, the less attention paid to them, the better. As a result, these agreements are often prepared in haste, with insufficient attention to detail and in extreme situations, such as an “ultimatum” before the obligation of marriage. Your client`s relationship or marriage is coming to an end. Reconciliation has been ruled out. Depending on the circumstances, your client may need to recall the existence of an agreement, or perhaps the agreement has been “front and centre” in his head since signing. Whether they had to locate it, dust it off and take it home, or if they never had to leave the top drawer of their bedside table after a night reading, this could now be thoroughly examined.
The prospect that it will ever be assessed on adequacy and fairness is no longer just an exercise in assumptions, it is now a reality. The assets and debts you have before you start living with someone can be protected by a cohabitation or marriage agreement. In addition, you can plan how accumulated assets and debts can be divided over the course of the relationship if you separate. Spos` assistance can also be addressed in these agreements. Counsel also stated that her usual practice would have made her ask the woman if she had asked questions about the list of assets and, in particular, whether follow-up was desired for the values. The court accepted counsel`s testimony and concluded that the reason there was no investigation was because the woman did not want to pursue the case for any reason. The court was “satisfied that the woman, for whatever reason is known, felt well in her state of information.” Counsel for the wife argued that the mere possession of a “comfort level” did not meet the condition of the agreement that the wife had “full knowledge of the nature and extent” of the husband`s property. Again, the ability of a party to defer a court`s residency agreement is mitigated by the fact that it did not understand “the nature or consequences of the agreement” through independent legal advice. The opinion of an independent lawyer suggests that the lawyer`s knowledge and understanding were “downloaded” by the client.
The applicant argued compulsively that no practical option was submitted to the signing of the agreement.