Wife to get €18,000 per month and two homes in settlement

v638sg7k1a92bx

I wonder if the allegations of domestic violence were reversed, would they be dismissed so lightly.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/wife-to-get-18000-per-month-and-two-homes-in-settlement-31158217.html

The court could not grant a decree of judicial separation on a no fault ground because that required a normal marital relationship had not existed for at least one year prior to the initiation of the man's proceedings in January 2013.

Emme

I'm female and I think the judge was far too lenient with this woman. €18,000 a month and 2 houses :eek: I know he cheated on her but that's no reason to slap him. If she felt that way she should have walked out, violence solves nothing. Perhaps she didn't want to leave the luxury lifestyle behind and she put up with his cheating until he ended the marriage. The divorce turned out to be a nice little earner for her and she won't have to do a day's work if she doesn't want to :rolleyes:

If there were children involved they should be looked after but if the woman concerned is capable of working this should be reflected in the divorce settlement.

imitation

When I read it i see a man who was pretty cold towards his wife, and even after it all he started the divorce. Violence is unacceptable, but a string of affairs cant be ignored either. Although shes getting a lot of money, its not 50% of the husbands considerable earnings, and as there are 4 kids to be looked after it doesnt seem unfair to me.

What would be a fair alternative ? Kick the wife to the curb, let her have dole size money while possibly looking after the kids while the husband keeps rocking it out with 1.5 million a year and houses galore?

KwackerJack

She should get noting unless she has contributed to his earnings in some!

All he has to do is support the kids......ridiculous that she gets all that!

18MonthsaSlave

Emme wrote: »

I'm female and I think the judge was far too lenient with this woman. €18,000 a month and 2 houses :eek: I know he cheated on her but that's no reason to slap him. If she felt that way she should have walked out, violence solves nothing. Perhaps she didn't want to leave the luxury lifestyle behind and she put up with his cheating until he ended the marriage. The divorce turned out to be a nice little earner for her and she won't have to do a day's work if she doesn't want to :rolleyes:

If there were children involved they should be looked after but if the woman concerned is capable of working this should be reflected in the divorce settlement.

If we follow your reasoning then any cold calculating man who is happy to cheat on his wife can escape all obligations to his wife by provoking her in to slapping him.

ancapailldorcha

imitation wrote: »

When I read it i see a man who was pretty cold towards his wife, and even after it all he started the divorce. Violence is unacceptable, but a string of affairs cant be ignored either. Although shes getting a lot of money, its not 50% of the husbands considerable earnings, and as there are 4 kids to be looked after it doesnt seem unfair to me.

What would be a fair alternative ? Kick the wife to the curb, let her have dole size money while possibly looking after the kids while the husband keeps rocking it out with 1.5 million a year and houses galore?

I think the issue is that if you reverse the genders then this outcome seems a lot less likely.

bucketybuck

In my opinion, labeling this as domestic violence is an insult to anybody who has ever actually suffered domestic violence.

This does not seem like a case where the wife was beating the husband for years, instead the guy was repeatedly cheating on her and at some point she cracked and slapped him on the face.

A woman scorned slapped a guy on the face, to equate that to cases of real domestic abuse is insulting to be honest.

Tefral

bucketybuck wrote: »

A woman scorned slapped a guy on the face, to equate that to cases of real domestic abuse is insulting to be honest.

No its not.. if the roles were reversed he'd be done for assault. Just because you cheat on someone doesn't make it alright to physically assault someone.

Nothing gives you the right to assault someone.

imitation

KwackerJack wrote: »

She should get noting unless she has contributed to his earnings in some!

All he has to do is support the kids......ridiculous that she gets all that!

Really ? Dude cheats on his wife, who probably gave up any chance of her own career to look after the family for 20 years, and she should be out on her own with no support ? Maybe you should look up the purpose of a marrage ?

v638sg7k1a92bx

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

If we follow your reasoning then any cold calculating man who is happy to cheat on his wife can escape all obligations to his wife by provoking her in to slapping him.

Do women ever provoke men into slapping them and would that be considered acceptable in your estimation?

Greenmachine

Outlandishly large settlement. The judge total fluffed, that fact she had hit him at least twice. If the table were turned, and a husband had hit his wife after she had the affair, it would have been treated very differently.
I personally think the settlement is too generous. Family home, holiday home and massive maintenance payment. Her monthly maintenance is twice my annual jobseekers.

v638sg7k1a92bx

imitation wrote: »

Really ? Dude cheats on his wife, who probably gave up any chance of her own career to look after the family for 20 years, and she should be out on her own with no support ? Maybe you should look up the purpose of a marrage ?

I don't accept this argument that's rolled out every time there's a marital break up. What was she qualified to do before she got married and what type of illustrious career did she forgo. Her contribution to the family should be recognised but what type of job is she qualified to do that would pay her 15k per month?

The reality is that many people are happy to give up their "careers" to stay home with their families because they didn't have a career to begin with.

v638sg7k1a92bx

bucketybuck wrote: »

In my opinion, labeling this as domestic violence is an insult to anybody who has ever actually suffered domestic violence.

This does not seem like a case where the wife was beating the husband for years, instead the guy was repeatedly cheating on her and at some point she cracked and slapped him on the face.

A woman scorned slapped a guy on the face, to equate that to cases of real domestic abuse is insulting to be honest.

Lets reword that statement and see how acceptable it is:

This does not seem like a case where the husband was beating the wife for years, instead the wife was repeatedly nagging on her husband and at some point he cracked and slapped him on the face.

Telecaster58

In the aggregate it looks like this woman got a very generous settlement, but on closer analysis did she? He earns €1.4m a year, which is €116k per month and she gets €18k per month. I think he's getting off lightly to be honest.

bucketybuck

cronin_j wrote: »

No its not.. if the roles were reversed he'd be done for assault. Just because you cheat on someone doesn't make it alright to physically assault someone.

Nothing gives you the right to assault someone.

Yeah, yeah, sure, cry me a river. And if she'd thrown a drink over him she should be done for assault with a deadly weapon. :rolleyes:

You can call it assault if you want, my point was for people not to try and claim it as domestic violence, because a single slap with good cause is nowhere near the horrific reality suffered by victims of real domestic violence.

Stheno

Does the maintenance cover the children?

bucketybuck

Anybody remember Jaws? Does anybody remember the deleted scene where Mrs Kintner got arrested for physically assaulting Chief Brody?

Pawwed Rig

The settlement itself seems reasonable as she contributed to his success. The only issue I have with the case is the casual dismissal of the slapping. That said society does not see a man getting slapped by a woman to be a big deal. Personally I got the favoured open hand across the face from 3 different girls in my time so I am sure many others understand how common it is.

Emme

Stheno wrote: »

Does the maintenance cover the children?

If the maintenance covered the children it would be a more acceptable settlement. I have a feeling it doesn't. There are 4 children and the mother was a "homemaker". I doubt very much that she was a homemaker without the help of nannies, cleaners etc. If she was then she would be somewhat deserving of her settlement but I think it is too much.

She seemed to be happy to stay in a loveless marriage as long as the errant husband supported her free-spending lifestyle. Marrying him was the equivalent of winning the lotto for her.

If this woman is getting €216,000 a year and this does not cover the children it is obscene. How many people EARN that sort of money? Remember she doesn't have to pay a mortgage out of it nor does she have to pay for the costs of getting to work such as train/bus fares, petrol etc.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The settlement itself seems reasonable as she contributed to his success. The only issue I have with the case is the casual dismissal of the slapping. That said society does not see a man getting slapped by a woman to be a big deal. Personally I got the favoured open hand across the face from 3 different girls in my time so I am sure many others understand how common it is.

How did she contribute to his success? Did she work in his business? I thought she was a "homemaker". There's a difference between a "homemaker" who does all the cooking, child minding and cleaning and one who has nannies and cleaners. To be fair we don't know if this woman had nannies and cleaners but they tend to go with a certain lifestyle.

Each couple to their own, but I don't think physical violence solves anything. It is a deal-breaker.

zdragon

wait wait wait.
Man earnings 1.7 mil a year.
216k per year maintenance is nothing to him, not even 1/3 of his earnings.

3.6 millions of assets out of 7 this one is a bit harsher, whoever not punishing the ex husband.

pension stuff? he will top it up very quick .
the settlement is quite lenient .

Emme

zdragon wrote: »

wait wait wait.
Man earnings 1.7 mil a year.
216k per year maintenance is nothing to him, not even 1/3 of his earnings.

3.6 millions of assets out of 7 this one is a bit harsher, whoever not punishing the ex husband.

pension stuff? he will top it up very quick .
the settlement is quite lenient .

The average industrial wage is around €39,000 per year.

If the judge wanted to punish the ex-husband he should have ordered a certain amount to be put in trust for each of the 4 children as well as maintenance for the children. I think children should benefit more from divorce settlements as they are the ones who suffer most.

jackofalltrades

bucketybuck wrote: »

A woman scorned slapped a guy on the face, to equate that to cases of real domestic abuse is insulting to be honest.

You can call it assault if you want, my point was for people not to try and claim it as domestic violence, because a single slap with good cause is nowhere near the horrific reality suffered by victims of real domestic violence.

Violence that occurs in the home is domestic violence.
It occurs at varying degrees of severity, and all people who suffer from it can use the term "domestic violence".
It ridiculous to start bringing in "real" into the discussion.

Would you be ok with a man hitting a woman because he was "scorned" or had "a good cause"?

LegacyUser

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The settlement itself seems reasonable as she contributed to his success. The only issue I have with the case is the casual dismissal of the slapping. That said society does not see a man getting slapped by a woman to be a big deal. Personally I got the favoured open hand across the face from 3 different girls in my time so I am sure many others understand how common it is.

It is common. I seen this quite a bit were male friends have been slapped, kicked and bitten, and the some of the responses were "it was only a small slap" "sure if he was a real man he'd take it" and the all time classic "he probably did something to upset her" these comments would have come from women!!! The assaults would have been minor, but if a man had done them he'd be in serious trouble,

KomradeBishop

Ya if you put in the context that they have been married 18 years, and that she has (presumably) been taking on all the responsibilities at home and raising four kids - enabling him to spend the time working, while she takes up slack at home - then there isn't really anything amiss here, as without her support there, he wouldn't have had the time needed to be able to gain so much money, so perfectly reasonable that she is entitled to a fair portion of it.

Graham

Emme wrote: »

The average industrial wage is around €39,000 per year.

How is that even remotely relevant?

I understand there's a large amount of envy when figures like this settlement are bandied around but like it or not the family have become accustomed to a certain lifestyle. It's hardly reasonable to expect that lifestyle to be destroyed (along with the marriage) because the husband can't keep his pants on.

zeffabelli

cronin_j wrote: »

No its not.. if the roles were reversed he'd be done for assault. Just because you cheat on someone doesn't make it alright to physically assault someone.

Nothing gives you the right to assault someone.

No he wouldn't. Not for an open handed slap with no consequences.

Emme

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Ya if you put in the context that they have been married 18 years, and that she has (presumably) been taking on all the responsibilities at home and raising four kids - enabling him to spend the time working, while she takes up slack at home - then there isn't really anything amiss here, as without her support there, he wouldn't have had the time needed to be able to gain so much money, so perfectly reasonable that she is entitled to a fair portion of it.

If she was married to man on the average industrial wage and he treated her the same way as the rich guy did she would have to go out and get a job to support the children and herself. She hit the jackpot.

I think that maintenance should be paid until the youngest child is 18 and then the woman should be on her own after that. Let her earn her own living like any other working woman. She would have plenty of time to train in the interim period.

Graham wrote: »

How is that even remotely relevant?

I understand there's a large amount of envy when figures like this settlement are bandied around but like it or not the family have become accustomed to a certain lifestyle. It's hardly reasonable to expect that lifestyle to be destroyed (along with the marriage) because the husband can't keep his pants on.

The children should have the lifestyle of the family but why should the wife continue with the lifestyle? She didn't have a job during the 18 years she was married to him and she didn't directly contribute to his business.

Pawwed Rig

Emme wrote: »

How did she contribute to his success? Did she work in his business? I thought she was a "homemaker". There's a difference between a "homemaker" who does all the cooking, child minding and cleaning and one who has nannies and cleaners. To be fair we don't know if this woman had nannies and cleaners but they tend to go with a certain lifestyle.

I work and deal with alot of very successful people in my day to day life. The one thing the guys and girls that earn the really big money have in common is that their spouse is there to pick up all the slack that is left behind when they are off meeting clients, arranging deals, sourcing etc etc. These people spend huge amounts of hours focussed soley on work. If you ask any of them they will tell you that their spouses role is vital to their success.
She may not have earned that much without him but the opposite would also be true. He got away lightly enough in this case. Assuming the kids are staying with her would seem logical that she keeps the house (considering he already bought another one for himself.

KomradeBishop

Emme wrote: »

If she was married to man on the average industrial wage and he treated her the same way as the rich guy did she would have to go out and get a job to support the children and herself. She hit the jackpot.

I think that maintenance should be paid until the youngest child is 18 and then the woman should be on her own after that. Let her earn her own living like any other working woman.

Yea so she went and married a guy, stayed with him for 18 years, and had 4 kids with him, just to hit the jackpot - right :rolleyes:

Without her taking up so much slack at home, he wouldn't have been able to gain all that money - she is completely entitled to it.

Graham

Emme wrote: »

If she was married to man on the average industrial wage and he treated her the same way as the rich guy did she would have to go out and get a job to support the children and herself. She hit the jackpot..

But she wasn't so again, that's not relevant. Do you know if he was wealthy when they married? Do you know if she worked at the start of the marriage? Do you know if she gave up a career at his request to raise the family? Do you know if she supported him through University, financed hid business through a family inheritance?

Pawwed Rig

Emme wrote: »

The children should have the lifestyle of the family but why should the wife continue with the lifestyle? She didn't have a job during the 18 years she was married to him and she didn't directly contribute to his business.

And do what? A 50 year old woman starting as new career?

Emme

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Yea so she went and married a guy, stayed with him for 18 years, and had 4 kids with him, just to hit the jackpot - right :rolleyes:

Without her taking up so much slack at home, he wouldn't have been able to gain all that money - she is completely entitled to it.

By all accounts she had a very nice lifestyle during the 18 years and according to the divorce case, she "spent freely". I'm sure there were a few nannies and cleaners to take up the slack as well. They cost money earned by the husband.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

And do what? A 50 year old woman starting as new career?

Why not? She wouldn't be the first 50 year old woman who had to go out and earn a living after years as a homemaker. 50 isn't old and you're never too old to learn new skills.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I work and deal with alot of very successful people in my day to day life. The one thing the guys and girls that earn the really big money have in common is that their spouse is there to pick up all the slack that is left behind when they are off meeting clients, arranging deals, sourcing etc etc. These people spend huge amounts of hours focussed soley on work. If you ask any of them they will tell you that their spouses role is vital to their success.
She may not have earned that much without him but the opposite would also be true. He got away lightly enough in this case. Assuming the kids are staying with her would seem logical that she keeps the house (considering he already bought another one for himself.

Is this not the same in all single income families???

zeffabelli

Zaiden Scary Rapper wrote: »

Is this not the same in all single income families???

This is true, but unrecognised outside of marriage. One person can work on their career while the other is stuck on social welfare raising the kids.

Marriage contains this privaledged recognistion. It is unjust that it is unrecognised in singe headed households...but that is another story, we are talking about a marriage here.

Wives however have a different input. At this level, social and networking and connections all come into play. He broke the oath/contract. Not her.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

And do what? A 50 year old woman starting as new career?

There are no guarantees in life. Many people in their 50's lose well paying jobs and find it particularly difficult to get back into the market because of their age. The only fall back they have is e188 per week from social welfare and statutory redundancy. The woman is this case should be compensated for her contribution to the family, which should be the equivalent of the market rate of child care costs plus house maintenance and a bit extra for good measure, but outside of that she's young and healthy and should rejoin the workforce just like anyone else or someone who lost their job after 18 years.

Btw - the couple are in their forties.

Lemming

Emme wrote: »

If the maintenance covered the children it would be a more acceptable settlement. I have a feeling it doesn't. There are 4 children and the mother was a "homemaker".

€15k for herself, €3k for the kids apparently. It seems a bit about face and I have trouble with the fact that the judge has awarded the rump for the wife and not for the children (or at least more towards the children) which sends a message that the kids played runner up to the wife's needs in consideration.

Edit: I also wouldn't consider the wife slapping the husband to be domestic violence; at least not in this instance as it's been reported. "Technically" yes (because it's spousal violence), but in reality no. Simple assault, absolutely, but not a case of domestic violence, unless it was something she did often, at the drop of a hat or some such.

zeffabelli

Zaiden Scary Rapper wrote: »

There are no guarantees in life. Many people in their 50's lose well paying jobs and find it particularly difficult to get back into the market because of their age. The only fall back they have is e188 per week from social welfare and statutory redundancy. The woman is this case should be compensated for her contribution to the family, which should be the equivalent of the market rate of child care costs plus house maintenance and a bit extra for good measure, but outside of that she's young and healthy and should rejoin the workforce just like anyone else or someone who lost their job after 18 years.

Btw - the couple are in their forties.

So in effect you want the state to cover it? Neh.....Don't agree.

v638sg7k1a92bx

zeffabelli wrote: »

So in effect you want the state to cover it? Neh.....Don't agree.

Yes. That's exactly what I said.

Carlos Orange

bucketybuck wrote: »

because a single slap with good cause

Please list the things women do that are a good cause for a man hitting them.

smash

Lemming wrote: »

€15k for herself, €3k for the kids apparently. It seems a bit about face and I have trouble with the fact that the judge has awarded the rump for the wife and not for the children (or at least more towards the children) which sends a message that the kids played runner up to the wife's needs in consideration.

This is it in a nutshell.

Carlos Orange

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

And do what? A 50 year old woman starting as new career?

She hardly needs a new career as she just received €4,200,000.
Plus she isn't 50. She is in her forties now , possibly even in her 30s when the marriage ended.

afatbollix

I thought the family court was private court and it wasn't to be reported in the papers?

Is it because this went to high court?

zeffabelli

afatbollix wrote: »

I thought the family court was private court and it wasn't to be reported in the papers?

Is it because this went to high court?

I think they changed the in camera rules. No names. Ids are protected.

The Dark Side

Considering his earnings and assets, the husband got away lightly.

The Judge was wrong to dismiss the slaps so casually, but IMO a couple of open-handed slaps does not equate to domestic violence and anyone who suggests it does can safely be dismissed as an idiot.

I would imagine the emotional trauma and abuse the husband put the wife through with his continued infidelities were far more damaging than a couple of slaps - the Judge obviously took this into account.

zeffabelli

The Dark Side wrote: »

Considering his earnings and assets, the husband got away lightly.

The Judge was wrong to dismiss the slaps so casually, but IMO a couple of open-handed slaps does not equate to domestic violence and anyone who suggests it does can safely be dismissed as an idiot.

I would imagine the emotional trauma and abuse the husband put the wife through with his continued infidelities were far more damaging than a couple of slaps - the Judge obviously took this into account.

I would certainly take a couple slaps over a deceitful, gaslighting, abandoning husband.

Pawwed Rig

Zaiden Scary Rapper wrote: »

Is this not the same in all single income families???

Yes but bear in mind that most single income families have the income earner home at a reasonable hour and for weekends. They can also plan holidays together and share bank holidays so the homemaker has some relief. The really wealthy guys work like dogs and are always on. Not unusual to do 18 hour days, weekends and have to cancel arrangements at a moments notice. It simply is not possible to do it and still have time to give the missus (itc) a break in the evening.
She would be on call too as many client meetings over dinner would require her to attend. We are talking about a different world here than what is normality for the rest of us.

Next time you are talking to your company's CEO ask them if you don't believe me.

zeffabelli

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Yes but bear in mind that most single income families have the income farmer home at a reasonable hour and for weekends. They can also plan holidays together and share bank holidays so the homemaker has some relief. The really wealthy guys work like dogs and are always on. Not unusual to do 18 hour days, weekends and have to cancel arrangements at a moments notice. It simply is not possible to do it and still have time to give the missus (itc) a break in the evening.
She would be on call too as many client meetings over dinner would require her to attend. We are talking about a different world here than what is normality for the rest of us.

Next time you are talking to your companies CEO ask him if you don't believe me.

You are essentially a single parent.

But if you are married you get financial compensation.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Yes but bear in mind that most single income families have the income earner home at a reasonable hour and for weekends. They can also plan holidays together and share bank holidays so the homemaker has some relief. The really wealthy guys work like dogs and are always on. Not unusual to do 18 hour days, weekends and have to cancel arrangements at a moments notice. It simply is not possible to do it and still have time to give the missus (itc) a break in the evening.
She would be on call too as many client meetings over dinner would require her to attend. We are talking about a different world here than what is normality for the rest of us.

Next time you are talking to your companies CEO ask him if you don't believe me.

Sounds like every self employed person and SME in Ireland tbh.

smash

The Dark Side wrote: »

Considering his earnings and assets, the husband got away lightly.

You see to have missed this: various investment properties valued about €2.3m in early 2014 but subject to loan finance of more than €7.7m

Pawwed Rig

Zaiden Scary Rapper wrote: »

Sounds like every self employed person and SME in Ireland tbh.

It is a different level and over a much longer period of time.
With self employed though you will find the spouse doing clot of back up work in and outside the business for the benefit of both.

wandatowell

My heart bleeds for them both.