₦airaland Forum

Kobojunkie:
Married individuals have no rights that supercede the individual's right to bodily autonomy; no such obligation as that assumed by you exists for those who are married.

2. A right to sue is just that, a right to sue. Nothing more. What the courts can do in response to a suit is some entirely different.

3. The court is limited in what it can or cannot do. No court has right to force two individuals to have sex. It cannot override an individual's right to bodily autonomy. And as you pointed out there, a suit of this kind creates good ground for divorce by the other couple.

princepee:
start with tuface..
All this yeye law for the poor.
Many Rich Men have multiple wives.
Go to the north.
Start there.
Many people will be in the jail you proposed

DrAkpa:
Lies

Oblongata:
Poor write up! Poor research! Poor analysis!

OP you tried, but you need extra effort to make your write up wholesome. can you fill in the gaps if you know it. If you cant tell us then you know nothing about this issue.

galantjoe:
Nigeria is not like oyibo country where wife share her husband property into 2
Or
Husband will leave his house for his wife to stay after divorce like oyibo people do

bdon123:
There is no law in Nigeria that givs a woman half of a man's wealth after divorce.fake writeup

Exceed15:
If she's denying you success then she's giving you someone else. End the marriage and have peace.

Kobojunkie:
It does no such which you claim. All it states is that a petitioner is allowed to sue under those circumstances.

DrFunmisticGlow:
Sharia law. This is only in the north

Kobojunkieee:
This one no follow at all. Where the statement is in red in the law. A return to cohabitation in the case that a spouse has moved out of the matrimonial home, which is what an Order for restitution of conjugal rights is, is not necessarily a return to the marriage bed or performance of what you tag marriage duties. The courts have no right or authority to overturn an individual's right to bodily autonomy. I would very much like to understand how you came about this connection you have made here.

Dtruthspeaker:
Shame on my family if they don't know their rights and allow a stranger to take what I never intended to give to them.

But I kukuma trust my children, dem already know law

Dtruthspeaker:
It is that giving that gives them that right. If you remind the child mama that that is not the contract, there is nothing the constitution can do

budaatum:
It sounded familiiar.



https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/108651-my-husband-denied-me-sex-for-10yrs-i-want-divorce-woman-tells-court.html

Samantha125:
What do you mean "a child you did not intend to have"?

Wouldn't you'd have been the one who'd have decided to step outside of your marriaga without any protection?

Whether you like it or not, you'd have brought that child to the world and he or she would be entitled to get equal share of your assets upon your passing.

Dtruthspeaker:
I did not go out to step out of my marriage. I went out to have "swim" and play.

I did not go out to buy or rent or acquire a kid.

Infact I dodged all those fertile women who if I do atishoo, a baby may follow to pick a woman who knows I just want to fun with her and that's all. No baby is wanted or expected.

Also, the partner in fun also offers this safe sex as she represents one nights fun

All these are the fine prints of the contract of fun exactly how it is written on bottles "liquid content only". So this one is a contract of pleasure only.

So, if she allows herself to get pregnant then, it is her own liability exactly how we use a hotel or Airbn and then they will call me because of the soap foams left in the bathroom?

If they like let them not flush it.

For me, no child I have outside my wife will ever get even a match stick. The woman who birthed the child knew the contract did not include her having children exactly as you women say you have a right not to get pregnant even when the husband wants to.

FreeIgboho:
Ok, crime implies punishment. What is the punishment?

FreeIgboho:
Ok, crime implies punishment. What is the punishment?

Kobojunkie:
What do you mean that they may start to cause problems? The one who caused the problem was the man in this. The innocent child has a right or should to his own father' wealth, after all.

Kobojunkie:
It just that your focus seemed a bit on ensuring the man's bastard child wouldn't get any share of his wealth.

Kobojunkie:
Small,because they are lesser beings or something?

Dtruthspeaker:
Yes!

A child that I did not intend to have and I did not take care of in my lifetime has no right to part take in my main family's benefits.

Dtruthspeaker:
Orphans too are human beings and no one is giving them anything

Kobojunkie:
Are you suggesting that the man should exclude the side-chick's children from getting anything by writing a will? That is cruel!