Is agreement binding before Decree of Divorce?

Azizur Rahman

Hello all.

Hypothetical scenario here. Two people are in the process of getting divorced. A Family Law Civil Bill comes before the court, an application for a decree of divorce. Both parties have agreed to the terms and conditions in the application. One of the agreement clauses is that one spouse will maintain their Succession Act rights until a sum of money has been paid. Only when this sum of money is their Succession Rights extinguished.

Now what happens if the spouse who is to pay the money dies before doing so? Does the other spouse maintain their Succession rights or does the sum payable become a debt against the estate of the deceased spouse?

Thanks.

Mr. Incognito

This is straight up legal advice and banned

Azizur Rahman

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

This is straight up legal advice and banned

It's a question as to what law takes priority. That could be construed as advice but ask any question and any reply could be seen as advice. I'm looking for views on the scenario, such as the agreement on the terms and conditions.

Or how about phrasing it this way - two people agree to a contract. One person dies. Does the contract die with them?

4ensic15

The succession act rights prevail. The contract specifically provides for what is to happen if one party dies without paying the money.

Azizur Rahman

4ensic15 wrote: »

The succession act rights prevail. The contract specifically provides for what is to happen if one party dies without paying the money.

Does it not become a liability against the estate as an agreement was reached it just wasn't fulfilled?

Peregrinus

Depends on the exact wording of the agreement but, as you have stated it in the OP, no. What the agreement says is "one spouse will maintain their Succession Act rights until a sum of money has been paid". There is no obligation there ever to pay the certain sum of money; the other spouse could simply leave the Succession Act rights outstanding.

The Succession Act rights are only relevant when one spouse dies. If the understanding was that Spouse A was bound to pay a certain sum to Spouse B and, if Spouse A died first, that sum would be a charge on his estate, then that's what the contract should say. If the contract says that the Succession Act rights remain outstanding until Spouse A pays a certain sum to Spouse B, then it seems fairly clearly to contemplate that, should Spouse A die without paying the sum, Spouse B will have her Succession Act entitlements.

Mellor

Azizur Rahman wrote: »

It's a question as to what law takes priority.

I don't understand what priority you are talking about?
There is only on Law in play here. The Succession Act.

Had it said something like "spouse will receive [sum of money] in lieu of succession act rights" it might be different.

Azizur Rahman wrote: »

Does it not become a liability against the estate as an agreement was reached it just wasn't fulfilled?

Maintaining succession rights is fulfilling the agreement.

Azizur Rahman

Mellor wrote: »

Maintaining succession rights is fulfilling the agreement.

I agree with that. But if the estate of the deceased pays the previously agreed sum is that not also fulfilling the agreement?

I don't know much about this area but would the inital agreement fall under contract law?

Mellor

Azizur Rahman wrote: »

I agree with that. But if the estate of the deceased pays the previously agreed sum is that not also fulfilling the agreement?

Probably not as the death creates a new (presumably larger) entitlement under the succession act.
But there's no answer really as it might depend on how it's phrased.

Pat Mustard

Following moderator discussion, this thread is regarded as containing a request for legal advice.

The thread will remain closed.