Sentences with phrase «of parties to a marriage»

The Council of Trent makes this clear: «If anyone shall say that a marriage contracted, but not consummated, is not dissolved by the solemn religious profession of either one of the parties to the marriage, let him be anathema» (Sess XXIV Can vi).

One has to wonder, therefore, how long it will be before there is reform and before the law in England and Wales is brought into line with social trends and the startling difference that currently exists between the position of cohabiting parties and the position of the parties to a marriage is addressed.

It found that s 23 and s 24 of MCA 2005 were governed by s 21 (1) to state that these provisions are for the purpose of «adjusting the financial position of the parties to a marriage and any children of the family in connection with proceedings for divorce, nullity of marriage or judicial separation», and was clearly intended to assist (living) parties to the marriage.

Another circumstance in which it is important for an individual to consider a prenuptial agreement is if one or both of the parties to a marriage is entering that marriage in a substantially different financial situation than the other party.

Singapore courts shall have jurisdiction to hear proceedings for divorce, presumption of death and divorce, judicial separation or nullity of marriage only if either of the parties to the marriage is (a) domiciled in Singapore at the time of the commencement of the proceedings; or (b) habitually resident in Singapore for a period of 3 years immediately preceding the commencement of the proceedings.

The overarching theme behind the changes put forward for consideration by the Commission is the enablement of parties to a marriage or civil partnership to be treated as responsible adults, who can, not only determine how and when their marriage is to end, but also agree in advance, subject to certain safeguards, the financial provision which will be made for them on divorce or dissolution of their relationship.

This view was confirmed in the subsequent case of Bevan & Bevan (2013) FLC 93 - 545 in which it was agreed that «notional property» which is sometimes «added back» to a list of assets, to account for the unilateral disposal of assets, is unlikely to constitute «property of the parties to the marriage or either of them».

Although s 25 (2)(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 sets out that the court shall have regard to «the financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future», needs remains a very broad concept.

(2) If, during the proceedings, the court considers, from the evidence in the proceedings or the attitude of the parties to the marriage, that there is a reasonable possibility of a reconciliation between the parties, the court may adjourn the proceedings to give the parties the opportunity to consider a reconciliation.

The Court can deal with the bankruptcy of a party to a marriage or de facto relationship involved in certain family law proceedings.

(a) an application is made for an order under this section in proceedings between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties to the marriage or either of them; and

(3) If a bankruptcy trustee is a party to proceedings with respect to the maintenance of a party to a marriage, then, except with the leave of the court, the bankrupt party to the marriage is not entitled to make a submission to the court in connection with any vested bankruptcy property in relation to the bankrupt party.

(1) In proceedings with respect to the maintenance of a party to a marriage, the court may make such order as it considers proper for the provision of maintenance in accordance with this Part.

(3) The provisions mentioned in subsection (2) only have effect as mentioned in that subsection so far as they make provision with respect to the parental responsibility of the parties to a marriage for a child of the marriage, including (but not being limited to):

(1C) For the purposes of subsection (1), the first proceedings set out in each item of following table, and the second proceedings set out in that item, are taken to relate to the same matter if one of the parties to each marriage, void marriage or de facto relationship referred to in that item is the same.

but nothing in this subsection shall be taken to limit the circumstances in which the court may form the opinion that there is likely to be a significant change in the financial circumstances of a party to the marriage.

(2) Subject to subsection (3), an order with respect to the maintenance of a party to a marriage ceases to have effect upon the death of the person liable to make payments under the order.

(iii) in relation to the divorce of the parties to that marriage, an annulment of that marriage or a legal separation of the parties to that marriage, that is effected in accordance with the law of an overseas jurisdiction and that is recognised as valid in Australia under section 104.

(e) a proceeds of crime order has been made covering property of the parties to the marriage or either of them, or a proceeds of crime order has been made against a party to the marriage;

(1) An order with respect to the maintenance of a party to a marriage ceases to have effect upon the death of the party.

(ii) if one of the parties to a marriage has died — the other party to the marriage and the legal personal representative of the deceased party to the marriage;

(2) The making of an order of a kind referred to in paragraph (1)(ba), or of any other order under this Part, in relation to the maintenance of a party to a marriage does not prevent a court from making a subsequent order in relation to the maintenance of the party.

(7) The court may, in forming an opinion for the purposes of subsection (5) as to whether there is likely to be a significant change in the financial circumstances of either or both of the parties to the marriage, have regard to any change in the financial circumstances of a party to the marriage that may occur by reason that the party to the marriage:

(b) the contribution (other than a financial contribution) made directly or indirectly by or on behalf of a party to the marriage or a child of the marriage to the acquisition, conservation or improvement of any of the property of the parties to the marriage or either of them, or otherwise in relation to any of that last ‑ mentioned property, whether or not that last ‑ mentioned property has, since the making of the contribution, ceased to be the property of the parties to the marriage or either of them; and

(a) the child is the child of both parties to the marriage, whether born before or after the marriage; or

(6) If the trustee of a personal insolvency agreement is a party to proceedings with respect to the maintenance of a party to a marriage, then, except with the leave of the court, the party to the marriage who is the debtor subject to the agreement is not entitled to make a submission to the court in connection with any property subject to the agreement.

(a) divorce or validity of marriage proceedings are instituted by one or both of the parties to the marriage; or

(a) an application is made for an order under this section in proceedings between the parties to a marriage with respect to the maintenance of a party to the marriage; and

(5A) In satisfying itself for the purposes of paragraph (2)(ba), the court shall have regard to any payments, and any transfer or settlement of property, previously made by a party to the marriage, or by the bankruptcy trustee of a party to the marriage, to:

(3) The applicable Rules of Court may make provision with respect to the making of orders under this Part in relation to the maintenance of parties to marriages (whether as to their form or otherwise) for the purpose of facilitating their enforcement and the collection of maintenance payable under them.

(iv) the property of the parties to a marriage or either of them, being matters arising between those parties other than matters referred to in the definition of matrimonial cause in subsection 4 (1); or

(b) in the case of proceedings in relation to the maintenance of a party to a marriage — that, at the end of the period within which the proceedings could have been instituted without the leave of the court, the circumstances of the applicant were such that the applicant would have been unable to support himself or herself without an income tested pension, allowance or benefit.

(4) A divorce order does not take effect by force of this section if either of the parties to the marriage has died.

(a) a court makes an order under this Act (whether or not the order is made in proceedings in relation to the maintenance of a party to a marriage, is made by consent or varies an earlier order), and the order has the effect of requiring:

(b) the purpose, or one of the purposes, of the payment, transfer or settlement is to make provision for the maintenance of a party to a marriage;

A divorce finalised where one or both of the parties to a marriage give notice that their marriage has broken down irretrievably and one or both of them are still of that view after six months.

(1) If there is in force an order (whether made before or after the commencement of this Act) with respect to the maintenance of a party to a marriage:

(1B) An order varied or made under subsection (1) or (1A) may, after the death of a party to the marriage in which the order was so varied or made, be enforced on behalf of, or against, as the case may be, the estate of the deceased party.

(b) the person knows that the property of the parties to the marriage or either of them is covered by:

Despite anything contained in this Part, if a divorce order has been made in relation to a marriage, the court may, at any time before the order takes effect, upon the application of the parties to the marriage, rescind the divorce order on the ground that the parties have become reconciled.

(b) the person is notified by the proceeds of crime authority that the property of the parties to the marriage or either of them is covered by:

Not exact matches

Even when one party tries to prove their relationship has lasted long beyond the legal start of the marriage — i.e., showing a joint bank account — there's no guarantee it will work.

But now, for those blessed to be free of family constraints or serious debts, a rising marriage age and longer career onramps can make the third decade of life seem — from the outside at least — like one big party.

(For) anyone in the Liberal party to equate the traditional definition of marriage with segregation and apartheid is vile and disgusting.»

The parties to each marriage that is valid under the law of any state will be treated as a spouse as defined in this policy.

In contract law, there must be 2 consenting parties to the contract of marriage, so pedophiles could never marry children incapable of consenting.

Corecco added that in today's globalized, multicultural, and secularized world, where the faith is something that can not simply be taken for granted, it becomes necessary to require a more explicit faith of the contracting parties, if we really want to save Christian marriage.

First, it extends the logic of the redefinition of marriage which the earlier legislation on no - fault divorce required: Marriage is no longer a lifelong, monogamous bond between two people of the opposite sex intended for the raising of children and the provision of a stable family environment; rather, it is a relationship of mutual convenience, to be dissolved as and when it becomes inconvenient to the contracted parties to mainmarriage which the earlier legislation on no - fault divorce required: Marriage is no longer a lifelong, monogamous bond between two people of the opposite sex intended for the raising of children and the provision of a stable family environment; rather, it is a relationship of mutual convenience, to be dissolved as and when it becomes inconvenient to the contracted parties to mainMarriage is no longer a lifelong, monogamous bond between two people of the opposite sex intended for the raising of children and the provision of a stable family environment; rather, it is a relationship of mutual convenience, to be dissolved as and when it becomes inconvenient to the contracted parties to maintain it.

Less than half of David Cameron's party voted in favour of same - sex marriage, with the Prime Minister needing support from other parties to get the legislation through.

You don't think the «elephant in the room» of OUR time is the fact that we awkwardly pretend affirmative action isn't racist; abortion isn't murder; people compare the gay marriage debate to 300 + years of black slavery, oppression, and / or murder; and the major political parties act like Ron Paul doesn't exist?