Quote:
Originally Posted by Tapioca
My understanding of the current law is this:
- Property acquired before the marriage: both you and your soon-to-be ex-wife get to keep what you acquired before the marriage
- Property you acquired during the marriage: split 50-50
- Income from assets during the marriage: split 50-50
- Pensions or retirement income: both parties are put in a place where pensions/retirement income will be split 50-50. She is a public servant, so depending on your respective incomes, you may be entitled to a share of her future pension. If you think she will try to fight for more than 50-50, then you could reasonably argue that her pension would be a set-off.
|
I think this is more or less right. I asked a friend who took family law what she thought and basically the presumption of the Family Law Act is 50:50 and it is very difficult to rebut that presumption if there is no contract or the OP willingly gives her more.
Judges may not want to mess around with property rights but the OP's spouse may argue for spousal support, for at least a period of time afterwards, based on, among others, financial disparity and a lower quality of life after the divorce.
This is coming from law students and not actual lawyers so take that it with a grain of salt. Family law tends to be very fact specific too. Again, the best advice anyone on RS can give is to get an actual lawyer.