Question

[Nunya]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HIELPEE</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
if she can prove that she was unable to earn wages, as she stayed home to care for a child, a judge will say then that she has no skills/potential to earn wages (as she was away from the job market) and make him pay alimony..even temporarily until it can be hashed out permanently in court. </div></div>

If he's able to prove that he at no time prevented or was against her working or going to school etc, shouldn't that indicate that her current situation was a result of her own making? And that he shouldn't be penalized for it?

[RichD]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body">


I'm just wondering if she left to be with someone else, she broke the marriage, why should be be required to pay to maintain a separate household even if he can afford to?

I'm also wondering if the judge will just look at the whole situation so black and white, so cut and dried... </div></div>

but its not so cut an dried...

why was she lookin man outside?

sound to me like the argument would be made that the union was broken from time and she finally could not tek it and left

[RichD]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

If he's able to prove that he at no time prevented or was against her working or going to school etc, shouldn't that indicate that her current situation was a result of her own making? And that he shouldn't be penalized for it? </div></div>

soudn like there was an implicit agreement that he would support her and ther was no requirment for her to work. he does not have to be actively preventing her from working to have an obligation.

[Nunya]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
but its not so cut an dried...

why was she lookin man outside?

sound to me like the argument would be made that the union was broken from time and she finally could not tek it and left </div></div>

Or it could be made that she had way too much free time on her hands... an de devil decide fi tek care a dat...

[RichD]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
but its not so cut an dried...

why was she lookin man outside?

sound to me like the argument would be made that the union was broken from time and she finally could not tek it and left </div></div>

Or it could be made that she had way too much free time on her hands... an de devil decide fi tek care a dat... </div></div>

that too ...but him never recognize it an fix it.

remember no fault

where did she live before they were together? Is his place? him invite her to move in?

[Nunya]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
soudn like there was an implicit agreement that he would support her and ther was no requirment for her to work. he does not have to be actively preventing her from working to have an obligation. </div></div>

Saying there was such an agreement, she broke that agreement when she left. His obligation to her should be drastically changed when she changes the agreement.

[ILP]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body">She's not making any abuse charges (she would not be able to make any stick). <span style="font-weight: bold">Basically, the papers (which I haven't seen) are asking for immediate support payments for her and the child. She's claiming to be destitute etc.</span>

She knows how much money he makes. They were a couple and he thought everything was open. While they didn't have a joint account, they do have 'access' to each others account - meaning she could use his credit card or debit card an dem ting deh. She should have her own account/money, unless she blew it on de bredda whe dash har whe...

I know the laws in Ontario do afford the same rights to a common law partner as they would to a married partner.

I'm just wondering if she left to be with someone else, she broke the marriage, why should be be required to pay to maintain a separate household even if he can afford to?

<span style="font-weight: bold">I'm also wondering if the judge will just look at the whole situation so black and white, so cut and dried... </span></div></div>

Based on the 1st bold...in the US a judge could award immediate alimony, as she has no means to support herself and the child. It could be permanent, but then that would be settled later.

Judges are what they are because they are charged with looking at things black/white, cut/dry.

O, and I said what I said about the abuse..not because I was implying that is why she left...I was saying it because a judge listening can determine that anything is abuse. He may/may not outright say it but use it when making considerations. I've heard judges here imply abuse (here in the US), even when both parties filed using the <span style="font-style: italic">Irreconcilable Differences Filing</span>. I think Canada calls the same filing No Fault.

[RichD]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
soudn like there was an implicit agreement that he would support her and ther was no requirment for her to work. he does not have to be actively preventing her from working to have an obligation. </div></div>

Saying there was such an agreement, she broke that agreement when she left. His obligation to her should be drastically changed when she changes the agreement. </div></div>

i don't think a spouse leaving gives up any rights to assets or support

[Nunya]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

that too ...but him never recognize it an fix it.

remember no fault

where did she live before they were together? Is his place? him invite her to move in? </div></div>

She had her own place. I cannot remember if she moved in with him before or after she got pregnant. I would guess it was by mutual agreement her moving in. She worked but did not return to work after her maternity leave expired.

[ILP]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If he's able to prove that he at no time prevented or was against her working or going to school etc, shouldn't that indicate that her current situation was a result of her own making? And that he shouldn't be penalized for it? </div></div>

But that would be a separate issue from her filing for the <span style="font-weight: bold">immediate</span> alimony. Currently what IS...is that she is destitute and without a means to earn wages and set up a house. A judge, at this point, wouldnt be concerned with who rolled left first and under what circumstances. At a later point....that very well may be a consideration.

[RichD]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

that too ...but him never recognize it an fix it.

remember no fault

where did she live before they were together? Is his place? him invite her to move in? </div></div>

She had her own place. I cannot remember if she moved in with him before or after she got pregnant. I would guess it was by mutual agreement her moving in. She worked but did not return to work after her maternity leave expired. </div></div>

sound to me like she will get the support. tell him nuh get her vex in case she decide to go after his pension and savings and property too

[Nunya]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
i don't think a spouse leaving gives up any rights to assets or support </div></div>

How can it not though? This is what I am having a problem understanding. If her safety and well being was never compromised...

sigh...

[Nunya]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
sound to me like she will get the support. tell him nuh get her vex in case she decide to go after his pension and savings and property too </div></div>


[censored] hell...

[RichD]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
i don't think a spouse leaving gives up any rights to assets or support </div></div>

How can it not though? This is what I am having a problem understanding. If her safety and well being was never compromised...

sigh... </div></div>

so in his mind everything was peachy at home ..is jus bad mind and slack she slack mek her go look man a road?

[ILP]

Re: Question

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Nunya</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
i don't think a spouse leaving gives up any rights to assets or support </div></div>

How can it not though? This is what I am having a problem understanding. If her safety and <span style="font-weight: bold">well being was never compromised...</span>

sigh... </div></div>

this is the &quot;grey&quot; that is relative and open to interpretation.