Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
  1. #121
    Old God Mistame's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Over Yonder
    Posts
    10,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And in doing so, renders your point false.
    And supports my initial comment that Canada's "concept" is in direct contradiction to the original concept.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    No, you didn't. You didn't show anything like this. This is where you start blatantly making shit up again.
    Learn to read.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    There's no violation of anyone's rights.
    Not getting married is no less a right than getting married.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    This isn't "forced" on anyone.
    We've been through this. "Forced" = "Against someone's wishes". If a couple wishes to live together without marital obligations and the state imposes such a status, the state has forced the status on the couple.

    As I said when you first linked it, that "concept" is insane. In short: If you live in Canada, don't even live with someone, lest you risk being cleaned out in a non-divorce.

  2. #122


    These text messages were entered as evidence by the plaintiff. He says: "I will need to check MY ticket" and not OUR ticket.. sounds like he bought the ticket himself. I'd like to see more text messages because this one doesn't demonstrate that they shared tickets.

  3. #123
    He should just say, 'look its clear to everyone that this was my ticket but as I'm not a complete asshole here is $1,000,000. If she wants to take it further then he can afford the best lawyers now to make sure she gets nothing.

  4. #124
    Way smarter to fake your death, plant a hobo's corpse in the burnt-out shell of your apartment, and piss off quick for the caribbean, or eastern europe, or the philipines with the payout.

  5. #125
    They both sound shitty so who cares.

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    Could be tough to prove, and generally speaking some kind of contract or paper work.
    Its been proven in other states in which a group of like 7 people who bought tickets togethered sued one of them who won like 140 million claiming the ticket he won wasn't part of the pool but a extra ticket he bought later on. I believe they ended up winning so there is some precedent.

  7. #127
    Banned Tennis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    You wish you lived here
    Posts
    11,771
    Quote Originally Posted by adam86shadow View Post
    Perhaps if you spent less time telling people to get married lose weight and move to Canada you yourself would get married @Tennisace
    Mate relax. I got things covered. Focus on finding yourself a wife.

  8. #128
    Banned Tennis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    You wish you lived here
    Posts
    11,771
    Quote Originally Posted by sefrimutro View Post
    Because OP made the thread about it. As they always try and present some article to argue some other unrelated issue.
    And that behaviour is left unchecked in these forums.
    People are responding to OP, not to the presented story. You are pretending that they are responding to the story, and choosing to ignore that the culprit of this stupidity is OP.
    It is about marriage. If they were legally married this wouldn't be a problem. She would get half. He would get half. Ezpz.

  9. #129
    In a marriage there is truthfully no such thing as mine and yours unless you have a pre-nup stating that. But after looking into it, and me forgetting that it changed in a 2013 supreme court ruling, common-law is 3 years(1 year if there is a joint child) in Ontario where this happened so it will not effect this ruling but if she can prove that they share purchasing tickets then she will get half. It is the way the Canadian lotto system works.

  10. #130
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    It is about marriage. If they were legally married this wouldn't be a problem. She would get half. He would get half. Ezpz.
    Tell that to the hellboy poster. The one who is questioning why these threads function as they do.
    I appreciate your art, don't spoil it with miss-targeting your responses.

  11. #131
    Quote Originally Posted by DrStiglit View Post
    It was a personal bank account. They aren’t married, there is no division of assets.
    That depends on local law. De facto couples have division of assets here, for example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mistame View Post
    I explicitly stated that she didn't work and there were no kids. Premarital assets aren't relevant, legally or otherwise. And many women get married straight out of their parents house or college. My point was that there are plenty of cases where assets are divided unfairly.
    Premarital assets are relevant.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  12. #132
    Old God Mistame's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Over Yonder
    Posts
    10,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    Premarital assets are relevant.
    Only in the context that they're generally not up for division. Any property or assets you owned prior to getting married remain yours, unless the assets themselves gained value in which there may be a division of the increase in value. This is mostly true for the US and Canada (varies by province). In the UK, it's mostly the same unless it's a case of needs (where the assets to be distributed are only just sufficient to meet each party’s needs).

  13. #133
    Scarab Lord Mister Cheese's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennisace View Post
    How do you know she's a whore?
    His money he can do whatever he wants with it. Tough shit for her but their relationship probably wasn't all sunshine and rainbows like you think it was if he just up and left.

  14. #134
    Guy sounds like a real winner...

    I get guys are sometimes in relationships they don't want to be and put up with shit for various reasons.

    He shouldn't have told anyone anything. Just get the money in the bank, play it normal...move that money abroad and then leave. Don't tell anyone anything.

    That's the way to do it. That's the way I would do it.

  15. #135
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    That depends on local law. De facto couples have division of assets here, for example.



    Premarital assets are relevant.
    There was a post I believe on page 2 or 3 where Endus stated in Ontario it was 3 years and this couple was only together 2.

    What are the conditions where you are?

  16. #136
    Quote Originally Posted by Mistame View Post
    Only in the context that they're generally not up for division. Any property or assets you owned prior to getting married remain yours, unless the assets themselves gained value in which there may be a division of the increase in value. This is mostly true for the US and Canada (varies by province). In the UK, it's mostly the same unless it's a case of needs (where the assets to be distributed are only just sufficient to meet each party’s needs).
    That really depends on the local law.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •