In this case, the man's excuse that she was full time house wife is not strong enough.
Did he start a business or got her a job that she refused to do to earn her own income?
If not, her full time house wife duty of raising 4 kids is her investment in the marriage and it holds water. Hence, they sell the house and share the proceed.
But make that man no reject or mistreat those children oh, he 'll surely regret in his old age oh. They are kids today, tomorrow at least one of can become a substantial somebody at a time when he's old and may need help from his children


However, What if the man had already built the property(s) before they married and lived in it together.
Does she still have a claim to the property ?

pansophist:


I feel sorry for women, na them go suffer am pass. Laws like this has a backfire effect. It seems progressive, but in reality, its deterrent in nature. It will make marriage completely unattractive to men. Western societies are in an irreversible decline of replacement birth rates. Thanks to law like these, Nigeria is preparing to board the ship.

And laws like these can only be enforced in civilised society. A typical naija man will rather kill the woman than watch her live in the house he built.

Its happening in the west

The other day, I read of an ex-wife who shared the assets of her now-dead husband with wife no. 2 on the pretext that the husband had promised their 2 boys a house in Australia..

Note their divorce occurred over 5 years ago. The husband died about circa 1-2years ago.

The earnings being fought over was from assets sold over 3-4years ago, long after their divorce, during the early part of the 2nd marriage.

But madam's amnesia suddenly was cured, alleluia someborry, and she is fighting for assets that were earned after her divorce on some recollection of a conversation or promise..

Madam no. 2 now has to share those assets/earnings.



Definitely what goes around, comes around..
That's why the online "feminist agro" rants sometimes make me chuckle.. As its often poorly thought through and very myopic in my honest and humble opinion.


.
As to killing... E Na vaa reach that level oooo...

.

Xisnin:

That won't be a problem.
You can always sign a prenup to dictate possible divorce sharing formula before marriage.
But I guess many people are too blinded by "love" to take that route.

Men are usually the ones too blinded by love to think of that option.
Many of ambitious Our girls nowadays use love a tool to handcuff/blindfold their unsuspecting lover boys while they scheme.

That has been the law
A family house is a house for the family and the husband has no right over it. It is jointly owned by the man and woman.
Note that there are no family HOUSES.

omooba969:


I appreciate your position as per pre-nup but you're yet to address the adverse effects of pre-nups coz we must remember that we're not robots but humans with feelings.

The "adverse effects" I see from prenup is that some partners would refuse and breakup.
Potential gold-diggers would also be weeded out in the process.

You may counter that there will be some couples who don't want prenup but
end up signing tone anyway, that is not really a problem as no system is perfect.
Anyone who is desperate enough to sign a document just to get married is less likely
to be a good partner in the first place.

I believe a breakup due to mismatch values is far better than a hellish marriage which creates
monsters for the society to deal with.

If a partner doesn't want a prenup, they can always opt-out and find another person who
also don't want a prenup.

You should note that every legal marriage has a prenup, that is the one the government and
the court writes for couples.

DeRay98:


Men are usually the ones too blinded by love to think of that option.
Many of ambitious Our girls nowadays use love a tool to handcuff/blindfold their unsuspecting lover boys while they scheme.

That's only to an undiscerning man...

Love or Lof.... Wharever u want call am... Im neva bon

The thoughts of all the sacrifices made, hustles, sufferings .... Enough to protect my little kitty...

Na people wey dey jam money anyhow, no sweat no back-breaking hustle fit toss a coin in the air and hope for the best..

Me... I prepare, prepare very well and pray Baba G answer.


.

BuddhaPalm:


Contracts are not made in a vacuum. There has to enabling legislation.

For example, we can’t sign a (legal) contract for me to kill you and harvest your parts.

Perhaps, it obtains in some alternate universe, but here it would be illegal.

It is totally legal in our country and there is no barring prenup.
It will be a comedy watching a lawyer to challenge such in court.

Your analogy does not follow. Murder is not a contract and is already illegal, so you can't
sign a contract to kill someone.

Most lawyers will go hungry if they only followed the contracts spelled out in the Nigerian constitution.
People sign contract everytime for any reason as long as the law does not ban such practice.

DeRay98:


Men are usually the ones too blinded by love to think of that option.
Many of ambitious[b] Our girls nowadays use love a tool to handcuff/blindfold their unsuspecting lover boys[/b] while they scheme.

I don't agree with the way you worded it.
In our society, it is men who pursue women with the promise of love,
so it isn't any lady's fault if she agrees.

Tedpgrass:


As to killing... E Na vaa reach that level oooo...

.

I hope it doesn't, and it shouldn't. Albeit, Nigerians are emotional people. And emotional people are violent. This is why I like Asians, they ain't follow follow like our people. Who sees the west as a beacon of everything good meanwhile, their own citizens are looking for escape out.

Talking about Asians..

The Indian tradition of the girl presenting a sizeable dowry is rather tempting.

I suppose it will create its own problems but anything for our Naija girls to gravitate away from their overbearing entitlement attitude and overt sexualisation....

I mean isn't there more to you as a woman than the peaks on your chest and the crevice between your legs.....


So annoying...

.

Good news

lilmax:
you are equal to a man but you need protection.

The Judge clearly stated that a divorce woman needed no maintenance therefore whatever amount is for the kids.

She also noted that as long as the woman remains unmarried.

Biko read the OP.

orion7:
what of people with 3 wives

Polygamy is a world of its own.

I doubt the law took polygamy into cognisance.

DanDeeBoss:
What if the man single handedly built the house

That can only happen before marriage which means the man still remains the sole owner of the home.

5thElement:
I don't particularly like or agree with this part of the judgement...



The husband will take half which is his own share and walk away while the ex-wife will take her share and use it to cater for the kids they both have?

Miscarriage of justice, your honour.

What do you suggest?

pansophist:
Just like western men have stopped marrying their women due to law like this, i foresee the increase of unmarried ladies and men refusing to marry as the laws like these become common place. You cant tell women they are equal to men and create laws that is unfair to men. Be careful what you wish for.

What makes the law unfair to men?

bukatyne:


What do you suggest?

Well the money should be split into two and given to each spouse. Then an estimate of each expenditure needed to cater for the kids monthly be calculated including school fees, feeding, clothing, recreation, etc.
The cost split in two and the man should bear half of it by sending it to the ex as child support.

That is the fair thing to do in my opinion.

That’s fair

5thElement:


Well the money should be split into two and given to each spouse. Then an estimate of each expenditure needed to cater for the kids monthly be calculated including school fees, feeding, clothing, recreation, etc.
The cost split in two and the man should bear half of it by sending it to the ex as child support.

That is the fair thing to do in my opinion.

cococandy:
That’s fair

The woman in the scenario went away with less.

Daeylar:



Thank you, very biased judgement.
So the woman isn't a human being herself? Just a caretaker, no, not even a care taker because care takers get paid. Just a slave to take care of the children. She doesn't deserve anything just for herself?




But a divorced man can be maintained. Stupid judge. The mans half goes to the man for himself. The woman's half goes to the children
-as if she impregnated herself and the children are hers and hers alone. Why wasn't the fathers share divided for the kids?

And the judge is trying to pretend that (s/he)is progressive. A situation where there are no kids. That means the woman can just be thrown out and given nothing.

Yet the useless man was shouting gold digging.

I'm tired of Nigeria's misogyny.
marriage to a Nigerian man under Nigeria laws seems to have absolutely no benefit to a Nigerian woman.


Yet somehow.
Nigerian Men think women desperately want to be married to them with all these misogyny everywhere.

Lol. You haf vexed?

GraGra247:


Does your house help deserve your house for doing domestic duties. Men do domestic duties too and nobody rewards them for that.

And to be fair men reward their wives richly for whatever efforts she's making at home. They buy their wives cars, expensive clothes, jewelries, shoes, bags, expensive phones and expensive vacations. They pay her hospital bills and every bill accruing to her.

So to demand she gets the house he built alone just because of house chores she does is ridiculous.

You obviously do not understand marriage.

I was referring to your last post. Not the one where the wind woman has to use her own share to take care of the kids

5thElement:


The woman in the scenario went away with less.

5thElement:


Lol. You haf vexed?

lol, small

bukatyne:


Polygamy is a world of its own.

I doubt the law took polygamy into cognisance.

it is not illegal either.

that judge doesn't know what he is stiring. trust nigerian ladies to abuse the law

Daeylar:



lol, small

cococandy:
I was referring to your last post. Not the one where the wind woman has to use her own share to take care of the kids

Yeah I know. I catch your drift. I was referring to the scenario in the original post.

What if you build the house before getting married?

adontcare:
Mr apelike1

Miss adontcare

5thElement:


Well the money should be split into two and given to each spouse. Then an estimate of each expenditure needed to cater for the kids monthly be calculated including school fees, feeding, clothing, recreation, etc.
The cost split in two and the man should bear half of it by sending it to the ex as child support.

That is the fair thing to do in my opinion.

How about the cost of physically looking after the kids? Or the woman will bear it all.

blank:


How about the cost of physically looking after the kids? Or the woman will bear it all.

What do you mean by "the cost of physically looking after the kids"?

She wants to be paid for taking care of her own children? Like getting paid for bathing them in the morning etc? Or maybe I don't understand what you mean.