Any Legal experts here? I need help with Law...
-
How do I answer these questions?
Q1) Mary stays in Orchard Apartments, her matrimonial home, together with her husband Ben, who was the registered owner with absolute title. In 2000, Ben deserted Mary and mortgaged the estate to DBS bank.
The mortgage payments are well in arrears. DBS bank then sold the estate by public auction to Mr John who has become the new property owner. Mary is asked to vacate.
Advise Mary.
Q2) Distinguish an "agreement to surrender" and a "notice to quit" -
I do not think there is sufficient intellect brains in this forum to advise you on this aspect. Frankly, better to call up a law firm and enquire boy.Originally posted by shade343:How do I answer these questions?
Q1) Mary stays in Orchard Apartments, her matrimonial home, together with her husband Ben, who was the registered owner with absolute title. In 2000, Ben deserted Mary and mortgaged the estate to DBS bank.
The mortgage payments are well in arrears. DBS bank then sold the estate by public auction to Mr John who has become the new property owner. Mary is asked to vacate.
Advise Mary.
Q2) Distinguish an "agreement to surrender" and a "notice to quit" -
deserted? they are still married is it? No divorce proceedings?
-
Sigh...its urgent...anybody with some knowledge on property law here?Originally posted by New Creation:I do not think there is sufficient intellect brains in this forum to advise you on this aspect. Frankly, better to call up a law firm and enquire boy. -
Nope, means that their still legally married as they did not go through proper divorce proceedings.Originally posted by Master -_-:deserted? they are still married is it? No divorce proceedings? -
10 mins legal fees $50 dollars apply.
-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzOriginally posted by angel7030:10 mins legal fees $50 dollars apply. -
Originally posted by shade343:
1. Advise her to get a good family law lawyer.
How do I answer these questions?
Q1) Mary stays in Orchard Apartments, her [b]matrimonial home, together with her husband Ben, who was the registered owner with absolute title. In 2000, Ben deserted Mary and mortgaged the estate to DBS bank.
The mortgage payments are well in arrears. DBS bank then sold the estate by public auction to Mr John who has become the new property owner. Mary is asked to vacate.
Advise Mary.
Q2) Distinguish an "agreement to surrender" and a "notice to quit"
[/b]
2. Notice to quit is used to terminate periodic tenancy.
Agreement to surrender is to end a lease before its termination date.
PS I am not a lawyer. Just a landlord and tenant at the same time. -
I cant give an answer to number 1 in your manner, its a 18 marks questionOriginally posted by fymk:1. Advise her to get a good family law lawyer.
2. Notice to quit is used to terminate periodic tenancy.
Agreement to surrender is to end a lease before its termination date.
PS I am not a lawyer. Just a landlord and tenant at the same time.
Hmmm, for number 2, I assume in both cases, one doesnt need the approval of the landlord? -
Do your homework.Originally posted by shade343:I cant give an answer to number 1 in your manner, its a 18 marks question
Hmmm, for number 2, I assume in both cases, one doesnt need the approval of the landlord?
Read case laws for the first question lah.
Please don't tell me that you are a law student.
I cannot answer for you because I only know question 2 for legal purposes in Australia.
Notice to quit- Landlord needs to notify tenant with 30 days in advance (Differs in certain Australian States). No need for tenant to agree - they have no recourse . It falls under recovery of possessions aka property.
Agreement to surrender - both parties need to agree because you are talking about negating a written contract ( "lease" ) before it expires. Everything in writing. Approval by both parties has to be in writing . -
Sounds alot like your homework. I am no legal expert, but here is my understanding.
1) Since you say it's a matrimonial home, Mary would have equal rights under the Women's Charter to have an equal share in the property. So Mary would be entitled to at least 50% of the sales proceeds.
Rights and duties
46. —(1) Upon the solemnization of marriage, the husband and the wife shall be mutually bound to co-operate with each other in safeguarding the interests of the union and in caring and providing for the children.
(2) The husband and the wife shall have the right separately to engage in any trade or profession or in social activities.
(3) The wife shall have the right to use her own surname and name separately.
(4) The husband and the wife shall have equal rights in the running of the matrimonial household.
Mary also has to ascertain if there is still equity value (positive value after sale and repayment to banks). If property value hasn't declined significantly since he applied for the mortgage, then there should be some equity value in the property.
Does deserted mean divorce?
Questions between husband and wife as to property to be decided in summary way
59. —(1) In any question between husband and wife as to the title to or possession of property, either party may apply by summons or otherwise in a summary way to any Judge of the High Court, and the Judge may make such order with respect to the property in dispute and as to the costs of and consequent on the application as he thinks fit, or may direct the application to stand over, and any inquiry touching the matters in question to be made in such manner as he thinks fit.
[16/93]
(2) Any order made under this section shall be subject to appeal in the same way as an order made by the same Judge in an action pending in the High Court.
(3) The Judge may, if either party so requires, hear any such application in his chambers.
(4) An application may be made under this section by either of the parties to a marriage notwithstanding that their marriage has been dissolved or annulled so long as the application is made within the period of 3 years beginning with the date on which the marriage was dissolved or annulled.
(5) References in this section to a husband or a wife shall be construed accordingly.
If there is no application for dissolution, then I doubt she can make any claims.
Just my speculation here.
If Mary is able to prove that she is the legal tenant in the property (paying rent in terms of Landlord and Tenant), she might still retain the right to live in the property for a certain duration.
Ward v. Warnke [1990] 22 HLR 496
The plaintiff's daughter and her husband occupied a holiday cottage belonging to the plaintiff. They paid outgoings and a small sum of £3 per week which later rose to £6 per week. The daughter left but her husband and child remained there. It was held that the husband was a tenant as the premises were let for a term at a rent and the family relationship did not prevent this. -
but they arent divorced.hence, the WC doesnt take effect..the guy has the right to sell his asset as and when he likes it since the home is under his name...unless Mary can disparage the fact the she has also contributed to the payment, she deserves an amount equitable to the contributionOriginally posted by maurizio13:Sounds alot like your homework. I am no legal expert, but here is my understanding.
1) Since you say it's a matrimonial home, Mary would have equal rights under the Women's Charter to have an equal share in the property. So Mary would be entitled to at least 50% of the sales proceeds.
Rights and duties
46. —(1) Upon the solemnization of marriage, the husband and the wife shall be mutually bound to co-operate with each other in safeguarding the interests of the union and in caring and providing for the children.
(2) The husband and the wife shall have the right separately to engage in any trade or profession or in social activities.
(3) The wife shall have the right to use her own surname and name separately.
(4) The husband and the wife shall have equal rights in the running of the matrimonial household.
Mary also has to ascertain if there is still equity value (positive value after sale and repayment to banks). If property value hasn't declined significantly since he applied for the mortgage, then there should be some equity value in the property.
Does deserted mean divorce?
Questions between husband and wife as to property to be decided in summary way
59. —(1) In any question between husband and wife as to the title to or possession of property, either party may apply by summons or otherwise in a summary way to any Judge of the High Court, and the Judge may make such order with respect to the property in dispute and as to the costs of and consequent on the application as he thinks fit, or may direct the application to stand over, and any inquiry touching the matters in question to be made in such manner as he thinks fit.
[16/93]
(2) Any order made under this section shall be subject to appeal in the same way as an order made by the same Judge in an action pending in the High Court.
(3) The Judge may, if either party so requires, hear any such application in his chambers.
(4) An application may be made under this section by either of the parties to a marriage notwithstanding that their marriage has been dissolved or annulled so long as the application is made within the period of 3 years beginning with the date on which the marriage was dissolved or annulled.
(5) References in this section to a husband or a wife shall be construed accordingly.
If there is no application for dissolution, then I doubt she can make any claims.
Just my speculation here.
If Mary is able to prove that she is the legal tenant in the property (paying rent in terms of Landlord and Tenant), she might still retain the right to live in the property for a certain duration.
Ward v. Warnke [1990] 22 HLR 496
The plaintiff's daughter and her husband occupied a holiday cottage belonging to the plaintiff. They paid outgoings and a small sum of £3 per week which later rose to £6 per week. The daughter left but her husband and child remained there. It was held that the husband was a tenant as the premises were let for a term at a rent and the family relationship did not prevent this. -
Originally posted by shade343:
Ok I may be wrong but here it goes.
How do I answer these questions?
Q1) Mary stays in Orchard Apartments, her [b]matrimonial home, together with her husband Ben, who was the registered owner with absolute title. In 2000, Ben deserted Mary and mortgaged the estate to DBS bank.
The mortgage payments are well in arrears. DBS bank then sold the estate by public auction to Mr John who has become the new property owner. Mary is asked to vacate.
Advise Mary.
[/b]
Pick the problem apart :
1. Mary is entitled to maintenance in any event if she was dependent on Ben. (Woman's Charter, Part VI paragraph 56 I think)
2. Ben deserted her - Part VIII - IX plus possible garnishment of any monies
3. Property - she has no say because Ben is the owner. However she is entitled to the maintenance ( go back to no. 1). -
There is no need for her to prove that she has contribute to payment of the house. If it's a matrimonial home, she can claim up to 50% of the property. I asked my conveyance lawyer on this before my purchase. If you are talking about non matrimonial homes, then you would be right.Originally posted by Master -_-:but they arent divorced.hence, the WC doesnt take effect..the guy has the right to sell his asset as and when he likes it since the home is under his name...unless Mary can disparage the fact the she has also contributed to the payment, she deserves an amount equitable to the contribution
In the rights and duties section of Women's Charter, it doesn't specifically states that the rights and duties will only be contingent on marriage annulment.
Rights and duties
46. —(1) Upon the solemnization of marriage, the husband and the wife shall be mutually bound to co-operate with each other in safeguarding the interests of the union and in caring and providing for the children.
(2) The husband and the wife shall have the right separately to engage in any trade or profession or in social activities.
(3) The wife shall have the right to use her own surname and name separately.
(4) The husband and the wife shall have equal rights in the running of the matrimonial household. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
She does not have a claim to the home because he is the absolute owner to the house and it is mortgaged to a third party ( "DBS" )who has a right as a creditor to foreclose. That is the issue.
There is no need for her to prove that she has contribute to payment of the house. If it's a [b]matrimonial home, she can claim up to 50% of the property. I asked my conveyance lawyer on this before my purchase. If you are talking about non matrimonial homes, then you would be right.
In the rights and duties section of Women's Charter, it doesn't specifically states that the rights and duties will only be contingent on marriage annulment.
Rights and duties
46. —(1) Upon the solemnization of marriage, the husband and the wife shall be mutually bound to co-operate with each other in safeguarding the interests of the union and in caring and providing for the children.
(2) The husband and the wife shall have the right separately to engage in any trade or profession or in social activities.
(3) The wife shall have the right to use her own surname and name separately.
(4) The husband and the wife shall have equal rights in the running of the matrimonial household.
[/b]
The only right she has now is to chase Ben for maintenance provided she knows his bank accounts or where he is working. If she manages to track Ben and his place of employment , she may be able to apply for an order to garnish his salary as maintenance.
Even if she has a part ownership of the house - the creditors are still entitled to foreclose. Price of joint ownership and accounts. Only her sole accounts are protected in the sense that it is hers, not shared with him. -
Ah! Thanks! Yeah, I think I see the difference. Notice to quit may or may not be agreed by the landlord but the outcome is still a break from the contract.Originally posted by fymk:Do your homework.
Read case laws for the first question lah.
Please don't tell me that you are a law student.
I cannot answer for you because I only know question 2 for legal purposes in Australia.
Notice to quit- Landlord needs to notify tenant with 30 days in advance (Differs in certain Australian States). No need for tenant to agree - they have no recourse . It falls under recovery of possessions aka property.
Agreement to surrender - both parties need to agree because you are talking about negating a written contract ( "lease" ) before it expires. Everything in writing. Approval by both parties has to be in writing .
No, Im not a law student...
-
I think you got my answer wrong. Check notice to quit again because it is roughly the same in common-law country.Originally posted by shade343:Ah! Thanks! Yeah, I think I see the difference. Notice to quit may or may not be agreed by the landlord but the outcome is still a break from the contract.
No, Im not a law student...
Notice to quit - Landlord issues the written notice to the tenant within the legal specified time required aka 30 days. The tenant has no recourse and no appeal. They have to move out, under the law. -
Originally posted by shade343:
I'm the lawyer.... Call me at 9*******
How do I answer these questions?
Q1) Mary stays in Orchard Apartments, her [b]matrimonial home, together with her husband Ben, who was the registered owner with absolute title. In 2000, Ben deserted Mary and mortgaged the estate to DBS bank.
The mortgage payments are well in arrears. DBS bank then sold the estate by public auction to Mr John who has become the new property owner. Mary is asked to vacate.
Advise Mary.
Q2) Distinguish an "agreement to surrender" and a "notice to quit"
[/b]