Divorce - Is she entitled to anything?

[sustento]

All of the above proves a point and this is why there are Lawyers and Solicitors to handle such things. And Judges to make judgment.

UK, Australia and Canada and some of the USA have similar Laws - different terminology ie common law wife, de facto relationship, domestic relationship, close personal relationship etc.

In England and Wales there is no such thing as a common law wife.

[Liquorice]

sustento, on 15 Nov 2014 - 14:49, said:

BlackJack, on 15 Nov 2014 - 14:13, said:

All of the above proves a point and this is why there are Lawyers and Solicitors to handle such things. And Judges to make judgment.

UK, Australia and Canada and some of the USA have similar Laws - different terminology ie common law wife, de facto relationship, domestic relationship, close personal relationship etc.

In England and Wales there is no such thing as a common law wife.

Correct, although it is a term often used for unmarried people living together, but it has no legal recognition in the UK.

[Liquorice]

AnotherOneAmerican, on 15 Nov 2014 - 14:41, said:

BlackJack, on 15 Nov 2014 - 14:13, said:

In my experience it would be hard for her to raise the funds for Solicitors and costs to fight this in UK.

I would agree to represent her for 30% of the take on a no win, no fee basis.

(If he were in the USA, in the state where I held a license, and he had assets worth $300k+).

I don't represent men in divorce, ever, not worthwhile (although I have given advice for a fixed fee).

I'm real happy I didn't ask you for advice.

Please read previous post #85 from someone who has gone through this in the UK, then you'd also know it's a County Court.

[AnotherOneAmerican]

AnotherOneAmerican, on 15 Nov 2014 - 14:41, said:

BlackJack, on 15 Nov 2014 - 14:13, said:

In my experience it would be hard for her to raise the funds for Solicitors and costs to fight this in UK.

I would agree to represent her for 30% of the take on a no win, no fee basis.

(If he were in the USA, in the state where I held a license, and he had assets worth $300k+).

I don't represent men in divorce, ever, not worthwhile (although I have given advice for a fixed fee).

I'm real happy I didn't ask you for advice.

Please read previous post #85 from someone who has gone through this in the UK, then you'd also know it's a County Court.

I did say USA.

Edited November 15, 2014 by AnotherOneAmerican

[realenglish1]

In a nutshell your screwed but to be honest with yourself You where married 6 years and to say she did not contribute is bull.

She contributed during the six years with the marriage Does not have to be finacially

She is entitled under British law 50 % of everything for that period of time during the marriage

[jacksam]

In a nutshell your screwed but to be honest with yourself You where married 6 years and to say she did not contribute is bull.

She contributed during the six years with the marriage Does not have to be finacially

She is entitled under British law 50 % of everything for that period of time during the marriage

Agree fully with post. Also to add in AU, its not 50% of what you have made after marriage. MUCH more complicated. Your present marriage assets would be considered also many thing such as each of both parties earning potential after marriage etc etc.

The OP would be getting of lightly with 10k pound.

[BlackJack]

In my experience it would be hard for her to raise the funds for Solicitors and costs to fight this in UK.

I would agree to represent her for 30% of the take on a no win, no fee basis.

(If he were in the USA, in the state where I held a license, and he had assets worth $300k+).

I don't represent men in divorce, ever, not worthwhile (although I have given advice for a fixed fee).

but your not in the states

[BlackJack]

All of the above proves a point and this is why there are Lawyers and Solicitors to handle such things. And Judges to make judgment.

UK, Australia and Canada and some of the USA have similar Laws - different terminology ie common law wife, de facto relationship, domestic relationship, close personal relationship etc.

In England and Wales there is no such thing as a common law wife.

she could claim under the property laws

as whatever term you use you are tenants in common and have common property that you have acquired together

so a claim can be made

but i doubt she has the money to fly

[laolover88]

Why does not the OP reply to the Leave to Remain question?

Who is paying for the air ticket?

How has she been supporting herself?

Why would he seek in any way to 'help her'?

Has he been maintaining her after her departure? Stupid!

Where is all the documentation? With the OP or the 'wife'? Translated, officially documented or not?

It is perfectly possible to sue for divorce in Thailand without the agreement of the other party...plenty of grounds..

Suggest OP gets off his 'a'

He says he has no property...so nothing there...Work? Pension? Good UK lawyer, let alone Thai one, would get the whole thing thrown out and settled asap. In spite of reputation both UK and Thai courts are fair, not stupid!

[Liquorice]

@laolover.

Yes she must have ILR.

In 2011 the requirement was only to have been in the UK for 2 years and gained the A1 English language certificate. There were no financial requirements then either. The OP stated she moved to the UK in 2009, so she would have got ILR in 2011.

If she then lives outside the UK for 2 continuous years she loses it. Maybe that's why she wants to return, or she has met someone else on the dating sites.

Edited November 16, 2014 by Faz

[lormakmak]

I really do not know about the above saying she has a claim on half of everything as that wasn't my experience when I got divorced earlier this year.

My situation was married 3 years and got married in uk

I already owned my property before she came and she contributed zero towards the house and any bills

But I kicked her out/told her to leave which she did

She then made contact with me a couple of months later and said wanted a divorce, wouldn't tell me where she was living and would only give me a friends address to send the paper work to, in the mean time I had been to a divorce lawyer and already had things in place as in this country you need a reason to get divorced so was divorcing her for unreasonable behaviour(I won't go into the reasons but they were justified) she then proceeded to ignore 2 letters regarding the divorce 1 from my lawyer and the other from the court when I filed for divorce but they had both been signed for and the proof was there.

Eventually the court accepted our petition to get divorced without her being present as she had her chance to respond and didn't bother.

If you can prove that it was all you paying then I got a feeling with the right lawyer you will be fine.

your missus just like my ex I suspect it being counselled by someone who reckons they know a bit more than what an actual lawyer would so I suggest you visit one right away and see where you stand instead of reading the scare mongers on here who are telling you she's getting half of everything... the laws have changed since the 1980's and the massive thing you have in your favour is no children/dependants other wise yes you would be bang in trouble....

cheers

Absolutely correct. Not having children puts a completely different face on it. However, where contribution is concerned, courts do take into account when a partner stayed at home and cooked and cleaned, which they consider contributing to community property. There is no specific law but I think a legal precedent was set in case where a couple lived together for just 18 months and the court awarded her a small % of community property. Even without prenuptial agreements court divorce settlements will still take into account what one party owned before the marriage.

That was a big part of my divorce and her getting nothing.... she had been working and earning for pretty much the whole 3 years and if it went to court and they looked at her bank statements it would be clear that she paid for nothing on the house hold bills, mortgage or utilities, when we went food shopping I paid for it on my credit card.

Massive mistake on my part for the marriage paying for everything because I have a well paid job but can't turn back the clocks...

All I can do is learn from my mistake and if there's any other women in my life they will have to contribute towards it the same as I do theirs....

Hence I won't be marrying a Thai again.... once bitten and all that.

Solicitor's in the UK will sit down with you for an hour and give you your options then if you want to proceed that's where the money starts... all in I paid £1200-ish and some of you on here will be freaked out saying i've been ripped off and they could have done it DIY but it was the best £1200 i've ever spent especially in the situation I was in where she wouldn't co-operate so we did the divorce without her...

[sirhips]

I’m English married to a Thai and about to get divorced.

Married in UK 7 years ago, also registered the marriage at my wife’s local Amphur office and we both live in Thailand.

If we complete the divorce paperwork at the local Amphur office - will this paperwork (obviously translated) be legally acceptable in the UK to apply for a decree nisi?

Advice would be appreciated.

[Liquorice]

If you divorce in Thailand, that divorce is also recognised in the UK.

Just the same as your UK marriage is recognised in Thailand.

No need to do anything else in the UK if you divorce here.

Get your divorce papers translated, then Notarised by the British Embassy.

[harrry]

http://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=19972

is worth reading basically there are conditions for it to be recognised mainly related to residence. 2c is the killer for most.

An uncontested divorce is the administrative or non-procedural divorce. This form of divorce is recognized in the UK only under special circumstances. In the UK, the validity of a foreign uncontested divorce shall be recognized if:

1. the divorce is effective under the law of the country in which it was obtained;

2. at the relevant date:
a. each party to the marriage was domiciled in that country; or
b. either party to the marriage was domiciled in that country and the other party was domiciled in a country under whose law the divorce is recognized as valid; and
c. neither party to the marriage was habitually resident in the UK throughout the period of one year immediately preceding that date.