Wow! This
world is really changing!!!. A grey area of law; fathers paying ex after years
of divorce. As sad as it may seem, learn from this, if you are a father that is
avoiding being a part of your child (ren)’s up bringing in any way or teenagers
who just wants baby but are not ready to take care of the child.
Let us
face facts here, how could a man bring a child into this world and for whatever
reason neglect the child? Do you think this is a fair decision? I will say, Yes
in a way; thanks to the Judges. With this new precedent, we may begin to have
more children who have a greater relationship with their dads. Statistics shows
that 70% or more of children in institutions are children raised by single mums
(HOW SAD).
Perhaps
as it is said, where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. So where
fathers work to invest in they will also want to see that their money is
rightly spent and in this case that their child(ren) become better individuals.
The role
of man include amongst others to be a role model to their children, a man who
cannot provide of his family is worst than an infidel. Fathers, please walk in
purpose and support the raising of your child (ren) as they are a gift from God
for you.
Mothers
support the fathers of your child (ren) so that they can be better dads to them.
Do not do things that will hinder the purpose of marriage. It is a union that should
entered with the mind-set of oneness and not with a bad intention to divorce
after a while so that you can make a claim.
Read with
me and pray that God will enable marriages to be as it was from the beginning.
Former New Age traveller
wins right to cash he made 10 years after they divorced
Richard Hartley-Parkinson for
Metro.co.ukWednesday 11 Mar 2015 11:42 am
Kathleen
Wyatt took her husband to court years after their divorce (Picture: PA)
It might
be more than 20 years since they divorced, and he may have made his money more
than a decade after they divorced, but this ex-wife has just won a a right
to cash from her former husband.
Kathleen
Wyatt fought against Dale Vince for a portion of his money all the way to the
Supreme Court where today she won.
They met
in their early 20s and lived as New Age travellers, marrying in 1981.
But a few
years later in the mid-80s they separated before divorcing in 1992.
Mr Vince
went on to become a successful businessman, launching a company called
Ecotricity.
Ms Wyatt,
55, eventually launched a claim for ‘financial remedy’ in 2011 which went
through the High Court, was blocked by three appeal judges
and finally passed through the Supreme Court.
Ms Wyatt
wanted £1.9million.
Dale
Vince said he was not happy with today’s ruling (Picture: PA)
But that
payout was deemed by justice Lord Wilson as ‘out of the question’. However he
added that justices thought there was a ‘real prospect’ she would get a
‘comparatively modest award’.
Mr Vince
said the decision was ‘mad’.
In a
statement, he said: ‘I’m disappointed that the Supreme Court has decided not to
bring this case to an end now, over 30 years since the relationship ended.
‘We both
moved on and started families of our own. For my part the passing of time is
extremely prejudicial, it’s been so long that there are no records, no court
has kept anything, and it’s hard to defend yourself in such circumstances –
indeed the delay itself has enabled the claim, because there is no paperwork in
existence.
‘I feel
that we all have a right to move on, and not be looking over our shoulders.
This could signal open season for people who had brief relationships a quarter
of a century ago… it’s mad in my opinion.’
Ms Wyatt
said after the hearing: ‘It’s an important judgment.’
Ms
Wyatt’s solicitor, Barbara Reeves, added: ‘Financial claims generated by
marriage cannot be extinguished arbitrarily by guillotine.
‘Our
client has had a very difficult time and we are very pleased.’
What commonly understood principle is this payment based on to an ex wife, who had separated so many years before the money was made?
ReplyDeleteIn reverse if the man had become a failure, would he also be entitled to being paid.
I think this is a misuse of the law, and this woman is taking unfair advantage of some loopholes in the law. It may be legal but definitely unfair.
We'll soon have ex-girlfriends suing all successful men, or ex-husbands suing successful women.