U
user123456
Guest
Are these legal in Ireland? Can a party to such an agreement go to court to have it declared void as it is contary to the law?
U
user123456
Guest
I did thanks. Found nothing of use to me. 
Z
Z100
Guest
I did thanks. Found nothing of use to me.
There's some discussion about pre-nuptials here
Also found this on an Irish solicitor's website:
Pre-nuptial Agreements
Agreements between two people about to get married which outlines who gets what if a marriage ends have become popular, mostly in the United States. However, there is no legal basis in Irish law for such agreements.
These agreements may be seen as similar to an agreed contract between two parties and based on this, it may have a basis in law. In the event of a marriage breakdown, one party can go to court and sue for breach of the contract (i.e. the pre-nuptial agreement).
PS
(1) "However, there is no legal basis in Irish law for such agreements".
(2) "These agreements may be seen as similar to an agreed contract between two parties and based on this, it may have a basis in law".
Is this not a contradiction?
I think that Case Law may come in to play here and all it will take is for one person to go in to court and have it accepted.
This may be possible if it does not deprive the other party of their basic rights and protection under the law and that the kids have been catered for.
I think that someone should chance it (as a favor to the rest of us).
This may be possible if it does not deprive the other party of their basic rights and protection under the law and that the kids have been catered for.
I think that someone should chance it (as a favor to the rest of us).
As the law currently stands? No. Pre-nuptial agreements are contracts. The courts will not enforce certain contracts which are against "public policy" (i.e. contracts that are immoral, illegal etc.). Because of the special status afforded to marriage in our constitution any agreement/contract that purports to restrict or otherwise interfere with a person's right to marry or that devalues the institution of marriage itself will likely be struck down by the courts (i.e. they will not enable you to enforce it). Pre-nup agreements are concerned with what will happen when a marriage breaks down. The fact that the agreement is made in contemplation of the break down of marriage (i.e. marriage is not being viewed as a lifetime commitment) will lead the courts to view such agreements as contrary to public policy. However, since the intro of divorce in 1996 (Family Law Divorce Act 1996) it could be argued that the institution of marriage has already been diluted to a certain extent so that it is only a matter of time before the courts here enforce pre-nups. A number of recent family court decisions have suggested that the courts may be more favourable to the idea. IMHO it's only a matter of time.
It could be argued that the lack of a pre nup acts as a dissencentive to marriage and therefore against the constitution.
Why would anybody who has spent a number of years building up assets get married when the partner can trade them in for a younger model after 2 years and take half of what they have worked hard to get.
You have to look at the situation of say a sucessful business man who has substantial assests who gets married to a woman of no means. Say 2 years later she gets fed up and has an affair with another man, husband finds out. To get rid of her, he is going to have to give her everything even though he is the injured party. Not right from a legal or even a moral standpoint. The law should protect people against such carpet baggers.
(1) Pre-nuptial contracts are not currently recognised in Irish law. See following link for some background information:
[broken link removed]
(2) The Tánaiste has appointed an expert group to examine the specific issue.
(3) Contrary to suggestions here, family law in Ireland does not require a 50:50 division of assets: however, spouses in divorce cases and children of the marriage must be appropriately provided for.
Indications in some of the "big money" cases are that (a) behaviour of either spouse can have a bearing on settlements reached, and (b) that the origin of the assets may have a bearing on the courts' decisions.
They are not enforceable contracts as stand, but if (and only if) a divorce is amicable there is no reason the parties should not choose to use any pre-nup as a model for final settlement. A party to such an agreement is not, however, currently bound by the terms of the contract, which is superceded by the marriage itself.
[broken link removed]
(2) The Tánaiste has appointed an expert group to examine the specific issue.
(3) Contrary to suggestions here, family law in Ireland does not require a 50:50 division of assets: however, spouses in divorce cases and children of the marriage must be appropriately provided for.
Indications in some of the "big money" cases are that (a) behaviour of either spouse can have a bearing on settlements reached, and (b) that the origin of the assets may have a bearing on the courts' decisions.
They are not enforceable contracts as stand, but if (and only if) a divorce is amicable there is no reason the parties should not choose to use any pre-nup as a model for final settlement. A party to such an agreement is not, however, currently bound by the terms of the contract, which is superceded by the marriage itself.
You have to look at the situation of say a sucessful business woman who has substantial assests who gets married to a man of no means. Say 2 years later he gets fed up and has an affair with another woman, wife finds out. To get rid of him, she is going to have to give him everything even though she is the injured party. Not right from a legal or even a moral standpoint. The law should protect people against such carpet baggers.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,270
Any update on the wisdom of Pre-nups?
I have always advocated people who buy a house together should have an agreement in place beforehand.
I would have thought it even more important for people getting married. A solicitor told a friend of mine that a pre-nup was worthless. My view is that there is no disadvantage to a pre-nup.
Brendan
I have always advocated people who buy a house together should have an agreement in place beforehand.
I would have thought it even more important for people getting married. A solicitor told a friend of mine that a pre-nup was worthless. My view is that there is no disadvantage to a pre-nup.
Brendan
In my view, many people entering into the marriage contract do not consider that what they are doing is essentially entering into a contract to care for each other - in all ways, including financially. A lot of people find it distasteful to talk money when romance is in the air. Considering that disagreements about monetary issues are one of the biggest sources of discord , this is really quite remarkable.
I am a great believer in getting it all out there in the open - in advance of the wedding day out. Talk about money, kids, family, future.
And I agree with Brendan that there is no (legal) disadvantage to a pre-nup. But it is not a romantic concept.
mf
I am a great believer in getting it all out there in the open - in advance of the wedding day out. Talk about money, kids, family, future.
And I agree with Brendan that there is no (legal) disadvantage to a pre-nup. But it is not a romantic concept.
mf
I think that as marriage is a legal contract which in the event of breakdown has potentially serious implications for not only those directly involved but also the greater society, there should be a legal requirement that a prenuptial agreement be part of the process.
When you think of the legalities that are involved in buying a house, one would imagine that surely the more serious contract of marriage would have more legalities attached.
As a lot of people aren't that interested in the serious legalities of Church marriage, maybe if the legal side of marriage had more emphasis, it would concentrate the mind.
The present situation is ridiculous and suits nobody. It should be more equitable and the family courts should be open to more scrutiny.
When you think of the legalities that are involved in buying a house, one would imagine that surely the more serious contract of marriage would have more legalities attached.
As a lot of people aren't that interested in the serious legalities of Church marriage, maybe if the legal side of marriage had more emphasis, it would concentrate the mind.
The present situation is ridiculous and suits nobody. It should be more equitable and the family courts should be open to more scrutiny.