Jogs1900:
■ Wahala. What of the man's first wife's interest? The judge didn't consider that. Does it mean despite marrying a woman under customary law, one can still marry another woman under statutory law?

FreeStuffsNG:
This is a revolutionary judgement . It no longer matters any more whose name is on the original property titles. The properties of the man is jointly owned by him and his wife even if it's paid for by the man.

Lifepen:
Men will learn to be careful of how they get married now

jahsharon:


The female judge is MAD. This case will get to the Supreme Court. So all a woman need to do in her life is to fucck a man, then she automatically owns half of his life’s hard work.

E no go better for her Mama. Na motor go jam her

oluwaseyi0:
some men are just mad

if you go through the write the woman even directly contributed to the house

the woman contributed 200k as part of the 400,000 payment she paid another money after loan people nearly sold the houseand married for over 35 year, yet the man thought he own the house fully and exclusively alone

Sablexxxtoons:
Don't sensationalise the judgement.. the woman contributed severally towards that property hence the judgement

"This inference of trust, the one for the other is readily apparent when each has made a financial contribution to the purchase price or the mortgage installment."

Jogs1900:

Wahala.

What of the man's first wife's interest? The judge didn't consider that.

Does it mean despite marrying a woman under customary law, one can still marry another woman under statutory law?

Sablexxxtoons:
Don't sensationalise the judgement.. the woman contributed severally towards that property hence the judgement
"This inference of trust, the one for the other is readily apparent when each has made a financial contribution to the purchase price or the mortgage installment."

FreeStuffsNG:
This is a revolutionary judgement . It no longer matters any more whose name is on the original property titles. The properties of the man is jointly owned by him and his wife even if it's paid for by the man.

Sablexxxtoons:
Don't sensationalise the judgement.. the woman contributed severally towards that property hence the judgement

"This inference of trust, the one for the other is readily apparent when each has made a financial contribution to the purchase price or the mortgage installment."

oluwaseyi0:
some men are just mad

if you go through the write the woman even directly contributed to the house

the woman contributed 200k as part of the 400,000 payment
she paid another money after loan people nearly sold the house
and married for over 35 year, yet the man thought he own the house fully and exclusively alone

He denied further that he did not pay N400,000:00 for the property as suggested by his wife but that he paid N3.750 million, which was deducted from his terminal benefit.

FreeStuffsNG:
This is a revolutionary judgement . It no longer matters any more whose name is on the original property titles. The properties of the man is jointly owned by him and his wife even if it's paid for by the man.

jahsharon:


The female judge is MAD. This case will get to the Supreme Court. So all a woman need to do in her life is to fucck a man, then she automatically owns half of his life’s hard work.

E no go better for her Mama. Na motor go jam her

FreeStuffsNG:
This is a revolutionary judgement . It no longer matters any more whose name is on the original property titles. The properties of the man is jointly owned by him and his wife even if it's paid for by the man.

FreeStuffsNG:
This is a revolutionary judgement . It no longer matters any more whose name is on the original property titles. The properties of the man is jointly owned by him and his wife even if it's paid for by the man.

jahsharon:


The female judge is MAD. This case will get to the Supreme Court. So all a woman need to do in her life is to fucck a man, then she automatically owns half of his life’s hard work.

E no go better for her Mama. Na motor go jam her

Jogs1900:

Wahala.

What of the man's first wife's interest? The judge didn't consider that.

Does it mean despite marrying a woman under customary law, one can still marry another woman under statutory law?