Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Member Strongarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Online
    10-06-2018 @ 07:39 PM
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    569

    Off his face and now out of pocket

    Off his face and now out of pocket in a divorce settlement

    • Man forced to pay dearly in divorce settlement

    • Wife given extra $150,000 due to drinking, smoking
    • Judge said drinking's "effect must have been significant"



    High cost: Booze and dope during more than 20 years of marriage reflected in the judgement. Source: AP





    FRITTERING away cash on booze and dope during more than 20 years of marriage has cost a man dearly in his divorce settlement.

    A federal magistrate decided his excessive drug and alcohol use meant his ex-wife should get an extra $150,000 - or 20 per cent - of their combined assets, The Daily Telegraph reported.

    The Federal Magistrates' Court heard the man drank six to 12 stubbies of beer a night and smoked marijuana almost daily.
    "It is not possible to say exactly how much this impacted upon the financial outcome with any certainty," magistrate Philip Burchardt said in a recently published court judgment.
    "But its effect must have been significant.
    "The purchase of a dozen stubbies of beer per night would cost a lot of money, as would the regular consumption of marijuana which, being an illegal drug, might reasonably be thought to be expensive."
    He rejected the husband's claim that the alcohol was given to him at work.
    Taking into account the effect of the excessive alcohol and drug use on the family finances, and the burden it put on the wife's marital role, Mr Burchardt said it was appropriate to allocate her an extra 20 per cent of assets.
    The wife told the court her husband's moods were volatile and he had subjected her and their children to considerable abuse when drunk or drug-affected.
    Mr Burchardt said that in a long marriage, in which the husband was the main breadwinner and the wife had brought up the children and worked part time, it might ordinarily be presumed that the parties' contributions should be accepted as equal.
    "In this case, there is no possible question that the conduct of the husband, effectively throughout the entirety of the marriage, made the wife's contributions far more onerous than they ought to have been," he said.
    The property pool was almost worth $750,000.
    Mr Burchardt said allocating 30 per cent to the husband would give him almost $225,000. But he has already blown nearly $75,000 since the marriage breakdown on drugs, booze and gambling, after his life went into "something of a tailspin".
    "‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

  2. #2
    Member
    Bettyboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:18 PM
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    30,153
    Mmm, are they going to start counting her expensive haricuts every 6th week, or the kids branded sports shoes as affecting the potential 'financial' outcome too??? This jusge is opening a can of worms; where do you stop?

    The guy is/and was the main breadwinner, as the judge says, but is due only 30% or less of the 'couple's total worth' due to the judges personal opinion of his character.

    & we think the Thais screw us over...
    How do I post these pictures???

  3. #3
    Philippine Expat Davis Knowlton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    17,876
    Just goes to show that a judge with an ax to grind on just about any issue can do about anything he wants. The nagging slag wife probably drove him to drink and a spliff or ten.

  4. #4
    Member
    Bettyboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:18 PM
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    30,153
    ^ yes, judges are a real problem in society.

    Basically, as you say/suggest this judge could've given the bloke 30%, 40%, 50% or 60% depending on how he was feeling on the day...

  5. #5
    Member
    Bazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    28-08-2019 @ 03:53 AM
    Posts
    979
    I wonder what her chances are of seeing any of it. Maybe thailand is about to gain another expat.

    In Australia a woman with kids and low income often gets a legal aid grant to fight these things, if the guy is working but short on money his personal costs to fight the case can going into the tens of thousands. Many guys (badly) represent themselves.

  6. #6
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 03:06 AM
    Posts
    60,584
    At least that's one area where the mussies may have it right:

    "I divorce you. I divorce you. I divorce you. Now fuck off!".

    The mullahs even ruled that it's legally binding if you do it via SMS, they're so dans le vent.


  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    08-10-2015 @ 09:33 AM
    Posts
    249

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by Bettyboo View Post
    ^ yes, judges are a real problem in society.

    Basically, as you say/suggest this judge could've given the bloke 30%, 40%, 50% or 60% depending on how he was feeling on the day...
    I was under the impression criminal judges have guide lines to work with-in. Do divorce judges not have guide lines to work with-in or do they have absolute power. Only asking because went through a divorce back home where not only did the ex shaft me, the cnut judge did as well and made it very clear to my lawyer and myself he would have given more to her if both sides had not agreed on a settlement. Not right someone has that kind of power over us mere mortals

  8. #8
    Philippine Expat Davis Knowlton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    17,876
    ^Depends on the state, but they have quite a bit of flexibility. Sadly, since they generally side with the woman, no matter the facts.

  9. #9
    Member
    Bazzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    28-08-2019 @ 03:53 AM
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtopskinnylegs
    I was under the impression criminal judges have guide lines to work with-in.
    In Australia it's the Federal Family Law act. Judges admister that, they don't make up the rules. That should also be true in every US jurisdiction.

    If you expect fairness all of the time you will often be disappointed.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •