Is your love as deep as your pocket? Part IV
We have been breaking down a recent judgement from our local Court of Appeal which concerns a married couple’s division of the family home, which has a specific meaning in law. The couple has a long history, with the wife being the husband’s 2nd wife.
The 2nd wife bought a property in 2003 for $17,000,000.00, and spent a further $13,000,000.00 on renovations which were completed before 2008. The property was bought in 2003 before they got married. The husband admitted that he did not contribute any at all to those costs.
He insisted that the 2nd wife bought the property because they both agreed it was a good idea to do so, and would make it their family home when he divorced his 1st wife whom he married in 1984. The husband 1st moved into the property in 2008 while still married to his 1st wife. The 2nd wife denied having any agreement with the husband to purchase the property, and said she bought the property in 2003 to provide a home for herself, her mother, and the child born in 1999, whose father is the husband. She also said, the husband only moved in after her mother passed in 2007.
We have been exploring one of the legal bases on which the wife challenged the husband’s claim for 50% ownership of the family home, and identified two key legal issues which were raised by the husband’s actions.
Basis #1: She owned the house at the time of marriage (Cont’d)
Did he make improvements to the property? (Cont’d)
Last week we looked at some of the improvements the husband made, and relied on to justify getting 50% of the family home. As he admitted at trial, those improvements were voluntary, and done for his benefit.
After moving into the property in 2008, the husband claimed he tiled and paved the area around the pool before their wedding in 2012. At trial, the husband admitted that the 2nd wife did contribute to the tiling. The 2nd wife denied that the husband made any contribution to the paving.
The husband also claimed to have painted the entire house for a total of $100,000. The 2nd wife denied this, and stated that the husband only painted a section of the front of the house one Christmas. She also acknowledged that the husband installed 2 removable AC units. The husband claimed to have made other contributions to the property but did not identify where on the property, and gave no evidence of the contributions.
2008…the path to wedded bliss?
When the husband moved in (2008), not only was he still married to his 1st wife but he had not filed for divorce from the 1st wife. The husband says he moved in, and they lived as man and wife. For the husband moving in was a big part of his case and good evidence that the property was intended to be taken as the family home, entitling him to 50% ownership. As far as the 2nd wife is concerned, they had an “on and off” relationship. In fact, the husband waited until August 2010 to file for divorce from his 1st wife.
Does the husband moving in scream commitment to you? Do you think it is enough to confirm that the 2nd wife had an intention for them to have 50/50 ownership? These are things the Court considered.
The husband eventually obtained his divorce from the 1st wife on October 5, 2011 but also moved out of the property in 2011 for 6 months, after a quarrel. The husband did not return to the property until after they got married in March 2012. Have your answers changed?
If you are like the lady in the 1st scenario mentioned in part 1 who refused to add her new husband to the land title, or if you are just against “fattening fowl for mongoose” look out for part v. We will explore how the 2nd wife tried to protect herself, and the role of their pastor.
Until next time, stay safe.
Disclaimer by the author: Nothing in this article is to be taken as legal advice. You should consult an attorney regarding your specific case. All liability with respect to actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this article are hereby expressly disclaimed.