May 25 2007
The
The London lawyers have done it again - another blockbuster divorce settlement following hard on the heels of a big settlement after just three and a half years of marriage. I wonder how big the legal fees were on all that? Our Petitioner/Respondent system encourages lawyers to encourage their clients to fight every inch of the way, instead of trying to get a more amicable agreement based around arbritration.
This time the ??Judge himself implied it was all a bit much, and suggested Parliament looks again at the law.
I hope the government agrees. People entering a marriage should be able to draw up an agreement about the assets they bring to the marriage,and which they can keep on divorce,??so it does not automatically mean they lose half if the marriage goes wrong. Such pre nuptial agreements should be respected by the courts.
At the moment divorce is great financially for the poorer partner but bad for the richer one. It needs to be fairer to both, based on their view of what is fair before their relationship goes sour. If agreements between couples were valid and could be enforced it would also cut down legal fees and the incitement to some to pursue unpleasant claims endlessly through the courts, based on a very one sided view of what went wrong.
John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College...
I thought that when you got married you took oaths and became partners. Becoming very wealthy by building a business obviously doesn’t imply honesty.
I reckon that he got off lightly.
JR:
I know this is off topic, but anyway, here goes.
Will you please raise this matter in Parliament. This man gave unconditionally when we were in need - but we are denying now he’s in need? Especially considering some of the awful specimens we allow in these days …
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=457426&in_page_id=1811
Here’s his V.C. citation:
No. 10119 Rifleman Tullbahadur Pun, 6th Gurkha Rifles, Indian Army.
In Burma on June 23rd, 1944, a Battalion of the 6th Gurkha Rifles was ordered to attack the Railway Bridge at Mogaung. Immediately the attack developed the enemy opened concentrated and sustained cross fire at close range from a position known as the Red House and from a strong bunker position two hundred yards to the left of it.
So intense was this cross fire that both the leading platoons of ‘B’ Company, one of which was Rifleman Tulbahadur Pun’s, were pinned to the ground and the whole of his Section was wiped out with the exception of himself, the Section commander and one other man. The Section commander immediately led the remaining two men in a charge on the Red House but was at once badly wounded. Rifleman Tulbahadur Pun and his remaining companion continued the charge, but the latter too was immediately wounded.
Rifleman Tulbahadur Pun then seized the Bren Gun, and firing from the hip as he went, continued the charge on this heavily bunkered position alone, in the face of the most shattering concentration of automatic fire, directed straight at him. With the dawn coming up behind him, he presented a perfect target to the Japanese. He had to move for thirty yards over open ground, ankle deep in mud, through shell holes and over fallen trees.
Despite these overwhelming odds, he reached the Red House and closed with the Japanese occupations. He killed three and put five more to flight and captured two light machine guns and much ammunition. He then gave accurate supporting fire from the bunker to the remainder of his platoon which enabled them to reach their objective.
His outstanding courage and superb gallantry in the face of odds which meant almost certain death were most inspiring to all ranks and beyond praise.
Hear Hear. Well said, John. It’s time for some common sense. Lawyers are the main winners, while more people are afraid of forming any sort of permanent relationship at all.
Tulbahadur Pun
It seems that these days, we allow to stay in this country almost anyone who can smuggle himself into Britain and utter the magic word “asylum”. These people have given nothing to this country, and are set only on getting what they can out of it. Some even, are out-and-out enemies.
Yet here is a man who, when we as a nation were in need, gave. And he gave unconditionally. Now when he is in need, what are we doing to repay him? Nothing.
You might care to raise a question about it at PMQs, or questions to the Home or Foreign Secretaries. There is discretion in the system to allow this man in - the system ought to be embarrassed into using that discretion in Mr Pun’s favour.
You don’t need any other issue than this man’s past service to our country. He served a total of 18 years in the British army. I once met a Qatari man, in Qatar, who had long service as a clerk at the British embassy. He showed me the British passport he’d been given as a reward for service - service involving no personal risk to him. So there is discretion, and it can be used.
If you go to the British Army Rumour Service (arrse) and read how strongly current and past members of the Forces feel about it (I am a past member), you may get a sense that we ought to help him. The story’s only been up a few days and there are already 42 pages of comment. They - we - will not let this issue fade. Be on the winning side. Indeed, do yourself some good: register with the site and make a supportive comment , and detail what you plan to do to help. Do you suppose you don’t have constituents of your own who aren’t outraged at this story?
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=66783.html