The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
...does this settlement set a very dangerous precedent?
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3872905.stm[/URL]
She gets a third of all of his future earnings? How the hell? Fair enough, she's responsible for getting him off the sauce and back on the straight and narrow, and deserves not only respect but possibly a settlement for that, but to crib from money he hasn't even made yet?
Does this mean we'll have paramedics claiming percentages of the future earnings of patients they've saved? They wouldn't have earnt anything if it weren't for them.
Legal eagles, tell me how this works please.
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3872905.stm[/URL]
She gets a third of all of his future earnings? How the hell? Fair enough, she's responsible for getting him off the sauce and back on the straight and narrow, and deserves not only respect but possibly a settlement for that, but to crib from money he hasn't even made yet?
Does this mean we'll have paramedics claiming percentages of the future earnings of patients they've saved? They wouldn't have earnt anything if it weren't for them.
Legal eagles, tell me how this works please.
i don't understand how people suddenly NEED to have so much money to get by.
i doubt she earned that much before they were married. it's gold-digging. pure and simple.
i doubt she earned that much before they were married. it's gold-digging. pure and simple.
Mr Snuggly wrote:
>
> Yeah, I realised that - the paramedic thing was supposed to be flight
> of fancy, but I forgot to make it obvious I'm not thick :)
~phew~ Thank god for that; I thought you were having a midweek brain fart.
>
> But still, isn't this a landmark case? Won't this open up thousands
> upon thousands of new cases, with people crawling out of the woodwork
> to claim percentages of future earnings of ex-spouses? Where do you
> draw the lines? Does it only apply to rehabilitation from
> alcoholism? What about drugs? Or depression? To what extent do you
> ostensibly 'earn' a cut of someone's future wage?
These rules have been in place for as long as divorces have; if a partner contributes toward their spouses career development, they are entitled to share in the fruits of that career. The problem is proving that you contributed in a meaningful way. Parlour is a public figure and his drink problem and subsequent rehabilitation with the help of his wife is a matter of public record.
It won't cause any cases that have been settled to be reopened, unless those cases were settled without one or both of the parties getting legal advice.
>
> Yeah, I realised that - the paramedic thing was supposed to be flight
> of fancy, but I forgot to make it obvious I'm not thick :)
~phew~ Thank god for that; I thought you were having a midweek brain fart.
>
> But still, isn't this a landmark case? Won't this open up thousands
> upon thousands of new cases, with people crawling out of the woodwork
> to claim percentages of future earnings of ex-spouses? Where do you
> draw the lines? Does it only apply to rehabilitation from
> alcoholism? What about drugs? Or depression? To what extent do you
> ostensibly 'earn' a cut of someone's future wage?
These rules have been in place for as long as divorces have; if a partner contributes toward their spouses career development, they are entitled to share in the fruits of that career. The problem is proving that you contributed in a meaningful way. Parlour is a public figure and his drink problem and subsequent rehabilitation with the help of his wife is a matter of public record.
It won't cause any cases that have been settled to be reopened, unless those cases were settled without one or both of the parties getting legal advice.
Apart from the £12,500 he already pays for the three kids...
I hope he wins the lottery and he stops working she wont be able to touch a penny
Light wrote:
> Nah; it's only applicable within the confines of a divorce case. So
> it'll only apply to ex husbands and wives.
Yeah, I realised that - the paramedic thing was supposed to be flight of fancy, but I forgot to make it obvious I'm not thick :)
But still, isn't this a landmark case? Won't this open up thousands upon thousands of new cases, with people crawling out of the woodwork to claim percentages of future earnings of ex-spouses? Where do you draw the lines? Does it only apply to rehabilitation from alcoholism? What about drugs? Or depression? To what extent do you ostensibly 'earn' a cut of someone's future wage?
*shakes head*
> Nah; it's only applicable within the confines of a divorce case. So
> it'll only apply to ex husbands and wives.
Yeah, I realised that - the paramedic thing was supposed to be flight of fancy, but I forgot to make it obvious I'm not thick :)
But still, isn't this a landmark case? Won't this open up thousands upon thousands of new cases, with people crawling out of the woodwork to claim percentages of future earnings of ex-spouses? Where do you draw the lines? Does it only apply to rehabilitation from alcoholism? What about drugs? Or depression? To what extent do you ostensibly 'earn' a cut of someone's future wage?
*shakes head*
Nah; it's only applicable within the confines of a divorce case. So it'll only apply to ex husbands and wives.
Whaaaat!?
The amount she is getting is so disproportionate its just plain wrong. Surely Parlour won't be playing for Arsenal soon anyway, he's past his sell by date, so she'll only get a third of his future earnings, on top of all these other fringe benefits like £12,500 for each kid. Its craziness I tell you, craziness.
The was rumour that Parlour might be player managing the team I support (Woking) in the future, as he knows the Chairman and one of our players well. I don't think we'll have the money to get hold of him...
The amount she is getting is so disproportionate its just plain wrong. Surely Parlour won't be playing for Arsenal soon anyway, he's past his sell by date, so she'll only get a third of his future earnings, on top of all these other fringe benefits like £12,500 for each kid. Its craziness I tell you, craziness.
The was rumour that Parlour might be player managing the team I support (Woking) in the future, as he knows the Chairman and one of our players well. I don't think we'll have the money to get hold of him...
...does this settlement set a very dangerous precedent?
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3872905.stm[/URL]
She gets a third of all of his future earnings? How the hell? Fair enough, she's responsible for getting him off the sauce and back on the straight and narrow, and deserves not only respect but possibly a settlement for that, but to crib from money he hasn't even made yet?
Does this mean we'll have paramedics claiming percentages of the future earnings of patients they've saved? They wouldn't have earnt anything if it weren't for them.
Legal eagles, tell me how this works please.
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3872905.stm[/URL]
She gets a third of all of his future earnings? How the hell? Fair enough, she's responsible for getting him off the sauce and back on the straight and narrow, and deserves not only respect but possibly a settlement for that, but to crib from money he hasn't even made yet?
Does this mean we'll have paramedics claiming percentages of the future earnings of patients they've saved? They wouldn't have earnt anything if it weren't for them.
Legal eagles, tell me how this works please.