How can someone protect the title during separation negotiations?

Yes he can. But no commercial lender would lend for such a thing.

probably not, but this is something she should seek her own legal advice on.

 

I saw a property for sale in Perth a couple Of weeks ago for 50% of a house. It got taken off the market prior to the auction though.

 

For the time they have been together there is high possibility he will get 50% of it.

I've always asked the question as well to my best friend is who is also a lawyer that if I met a girl today and I have 20+ property portfolio. I accomplished all this before she even came into my life. Lets say we get married for 10 years and get divorced will she get half?

His response to that is she most likely will. The family law system is not fair in these type of scenarios. My view is that whatever you come into the marriage with is yours and only yours. Whatever is built together is split.

I know of sooooo many cases whereby either the man or woman got screwed over in divorce because the split is never often fair and the person who goes into the relationship with "more" is often left with a lot less after separation.

I heard there was some kind of action or something happening to fix up or modify family law since there have been so many complaints regarding this type of thing. Need to find something on it.

 

Prenup?

 

I've asked more than 10+ lawyers I think over the years. What I hear regarding them is that they mostly work when circumstances of a relationship don't really change. (i.e) you guys never have kids, she/he never becomes a stay at home mom/dad, you guys don't start any other business, one partner never becomes fully reliant on the other during the relationship, health issues etc etc....

Once circumstances change the family law court will mostly likely not hold it up. I guess it will depend on how all your assets are structured and how much $$$ you have to spend on family lawyers as well but what the general consensus is a prenup is not a guarantee on anything.

I hear in the US its a little different.

 

postnup? sounds like they are already a couple. In Australia it is called a binding financial agreement and unlikely they will agree on it now but worth considering

 

when i did my prenup, I've been advised it's kinda a 50-50 if it ever holds up in court (and my lawyer is a big-un) . also in aus, the more one-sided your pre-up the less likely it will hold up in court


as said in a previous reply, its basically depends in circumstances and how you set it up

watertight is always the answer (but how tight is watertight ) (judge, jury, jurisdictions, circumstances, your prenup might be 30 years old before you divorce many laws would have changed ?)


you are supposed to update your prenup everything something significant changes

kids
illness
inheritance (you know you got a chunky one coming)
setting up a business
etc etc you get the juice

the other way to counter this is
I am the only child

everything that is mine I put in my mom's name(and she lives overseas) and hers is in her name
everything we share is me and my wife
so technically I cant lose if we get a divorce tomorrow

 

Doesn’t that create some tax issues?

 

The courts can see your mum as trustee for you and treat it as if you owned it. Judgments can be enforced in foreign jurisdictions too, although it can be more difficult and costly.

 

I would buy half a house, if it came with a wife. Two assets for the price of one.

 

I believe he can sell his 50% share to anyone he wants, although finding a buyer may be difficult unless he greatly reduces the price out of spite.

This can sometimes occur in Bailiff auctions that I have seen advertised.

Note: If the ownership was joint tenants then he couldn't sell his share.

 

how would the transfer be signed? when there are joint owners and one wants to sell when the other doesn't that would require a court application and have a trustee appointed

Legal Tip 70: Two owners of a property - one wants to sell the other doesn't Legal Tip 70: Two owners of a property - one wants to sell the other doesn't

 

She pay the taxes, she keeps the income. I only take what I need.

Again different jurisdictions

yes but my point is the fba is aus is kinda 50-50 and as a non legal professional doesn’t really give me allot of confidences unlike in United States


Then there is many jurisdictions that don’t split any asset in a divorce mainly in asia

 

I am not a lawyer but my understanding of the laws around "Tenants in Common" is different to that of @Terry_w, however it may also vary by state.

A quick google referencing Queensland gave the following:
Co-Ownership: Tenants in Common & Joint Tenants


PROPERTY OWNERSHIP

Co-Owners of land in Queensland must be registered as joint tenants or tenants in common. If a transfer of property is silent on the issue it is recognised that the Co-owners hold as tenants in common in equal shares.

Tenancy in Common

Two or more persons may hold property as tenants in common in any shares they choose.

For example:

A, B,& C purchase a property for $90,000.

A contributes $20,000, B, $30,000 and C, $40,000.

The transfer is noted as follows 'A as to 2/9 share, B as to 3/9 share and C as to 4/9 share as tenants in common'. The holding does not have to represent the party's respective contributions, however as will be seen later it is preferable. Each tenant in common has the right to deal with their share of the property separate from the others. This means the individual owners can sell or mortgage their share of the property, although practically it can be difficult, legally the share of a tenant in common can be dealt with separately of the other co-owners.

An important difference between tenants in common and joint tenants is how the individual owner's share passes upon the death of the owner. When a tenant in common dies their share of the property passes in accordance with their instructions as set out in their will. It is imperative if you hold any property as a tenant in common that you have a valid and enforceable will, which specifies the person or the organisation which is to receive the benefit of your share of the property.

If you have no valid enforceable Will, the Public Trustee will administer your estate and the share may not pass to the person or organisation you intended.

Tenants in common is the only holding which allows you absolute control over who will receive your share upon death, for as you will see with a joint tenancy this is pre-determined and you cannot change your mind.

 

I'm a family lawyer and your friend seems pretty off the mark. I guess they don't practice in family law?

 

This is true. But the other parties will need to sign the transfer.

This is not the case. The property will vest in the public trust until Adminstration is granted, but the 'Administrator of the estate' will administer the estate. The is usually a family member who applies to the court to be appointed where there is no will - similar to the executor role.

 

He is a partner now but his wife has been practicing family law for 20+ years.

So why dont you enlighten us with the REAL information then? Like I said above I've asked advice from over 10+ family lawyers now and KinG3oOo's post is pretty much mimics what I have said in terms of prenups.

Are you saying a prenup is a 100% guarantee for asset protection? If you can provide that please PM me I'll pay you a HUGE sum of money and I know many ppl that will as well.

 

Why have you asked over 10 family lawyers the same question? Were you paying for advice?