Divorce advice

[ASB]

"Supposing your parents have died and have left you a financial inheritance but your ex’s have not yet passed on. "

In this parents died so obviously if you are in the will (or it's under dispute) then inheritance can be taken into account.

YOUR future earnings maybe taken into account if wife helped write book and then you get future royalties, that's obvious, but you can't take into account stuff like future lottery win or inheritance that you may or may not get.

Courts can't do what they like even though sometimes they make strange decisions.

God you've made me go and look up the wording of the MCA.

Section 25(2)(a) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 states that the court shall have regard to, inter alia, “the income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future”

See the word likely? I'm not saying they will look at future possible inheritance only that they can. In much the same way as they can unwind settlement from discretionary trust for example.

[AtW]

See the word likely? I'm not saying they will look at future possible inheritance only that they can. In much the same way as they can unwind settlement from discretionary trust for example.

This act is from 1973, that's like more than 30 years now.

Can you point me to court cases in which one party successfully managed to get part of the inheritance for the other party when such inheritance was not yet awarded as the parents were still alive when divorse was being finalised? These "future earnings" relate in my view to stuff like I described - royalties from book if it was written during time of marriage and stuff like that.

I plan to put most of my SKA money into charitable foundation - I'd like to see ex-wife trying to get anything out of it

[ASB]

This act is from 1973, that's like more than 30 years now.

Can you point me to court cases in which one party successfully managed to get part of the inheritance for the other party when such inheritance was not yet awarded as the parents were still alive when divorse was being finalised? These "future earnings" relate in my view to stuff like I described - royalties from book if it was written during time of marriage and stuff like that.

I plan to put most of my SKA money into charitable foundation - I'd like to see ex-wife trying to get anything out of it

I think you'll find it's still current. Last try:-

http://www.bsdivorcesolicitors.co.uk/capital.php

6) Expectations

The divorce courts will consider any income or property which a party is likely to have in the foreseeable future. This will include such things as damages for personal injury or share options. It also includes inheritance prospects.

In order to be included, the expectation needs to be a real and imminent prospect, testators can make a new will whenever they wish and the court cannot order a third party to reveal his intentions nor stick to them. Furthermore, share prices can go down as well as up.

Now, I, most family law practices and the act of parliament may be right. i.e. they they can consider furture inheritance. Not will, just can. Alternatively the possibility does exist that everybody in the UK qualified in family law is wrong.

[Toolpusher]

I plan to put most of my SKA money into charitable foundation - I'd like to see ex-wife trying to get anything out of it

If your ex-wife uses SKA to try and find your money, at least you know she won't find anything!

[AtW]

Not will, just can. Alternatively the possibility does exist that everybody in the UK qualified in family law is wrong.

According to that law future lottery wins can also be considered. Obviously that's not what Parliament intended - the act was in force for over 30 years and unless you can show actual cases that split future inheritance while parents were alive I won't accept that this possibility is anything but remote: parents can just change will and that's it, no inheritance.

Indeed your own link states that in some EU countries inhereitance is excluded completely and it is the case in Scotland.

I mean, FFS, when Diana got divorced could she not ask for 50% of Prince Charles future inheritance? The whole concept is utterly ridiculous - show me court cases that ruled in such a way, and if you ain't got any then stop scaremongering.

[BrilloPad]

I plan to put most of my SKA money into charitable foundation - I'd like to see ex-wife trying to get anything out of it

I am sure the charitable foundations will be grateful for the huge amounts they receive.......

[AtW]

I am sure the charitable foundations will be grateful for the huge amounts they receive.......

It will be charitable fund in my name

[ASB]

and unless you can show actual cases that split future inheritance while parents were alive I won't accept that this possibility is anything but remote: parents can just change will and that's it, no inheritance.

Good, so you finally agree. I never said any more than they can consider it, which you now seem to accept.

Oh, BTW, look for Zoe Rowland. Don't think it's actually settled and I doubt the judgement will become public anyway, but that is somebody actively persuing a claim against her ex husbands future inheritance.

[JamieMoles]

In order to be included, the expectation needs to be a real and imminent prospect, testators can make a new will whenever they wish and the court cannot order a third party to reveal his intentions nor stick to them.

I think the two parts highlighted here make the inclusion of most inheritances unlikely as AtW said.

Firstly they have to be imminent, secondly the courts can't order your parents to reveal their intentions.

If your parents don't like your wife (or can be persuaded not to cooperate) then it's essentially game over for her attempting to tap into your inheritance.

[AtW]

Good, so you finally agree.

No I don't

I never said any more than they can consider it, which you now seem to accept.

Unless they are high on drugs they won't consider it for that particular case I defined - it did not happen and it won't happen, and even if it will then it will be overturned pretty quickly.