Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FARMERS WANT LEGISLATION to be introduced that will protect their assets in the event of a marriage breakdown.
Three-quarters of farmers are in favour of prenuptial agreements being recognised in law, according to an Irish Examiner/Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association (ICMSA) opinion poll.
Speaking on Today with Seán O’Rourke, ICMSA president John Comer said the current legal situation results in “ambiguity of the highest order” – and not just for farmers.
Comer noted that farmers recently had “a very open and frank meeting” with Justice Minister Frances Fitzgerald about the issue.
“Farmer are as romantic as any other part of society, but they are also pragmatic.”
What they want put into prenups is a level of security that if you walk into an arrangement with a certain level of assets that there won’t be any potential for, and I hate saying it over live radio, for gold diggers perhaps or maybe more vulnerable elements of a partnership being exploited.
Comer said he is aware of many cases “where marriages haven’t lasted more than six and eight months” and the family farm that may have been built up over generations had to be sold off as part of the divorce settlement.
He said the current uncertainty around the issue has made some farmers reluctant to transfer land to their children.
On the same programme, Tim Bracken, author of the Probate Handbook, noted that prenups could still be challenged as circumstances may have changed dramatically from the time they were signed to the time of a separation.
A spokesperson for the Department of Justice told TheJournal.ie Fitzgerald has “indicated that a further review will take place which would provide an opportunity for farm representative bodies such as IFA and ICMSA to present any available evidence on the need for the introduction of pre-nups”.
They added that the minister will also allow other views to be heard, “particularly in terms of the constitutional and public policy implications”.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
But she ain’t messin’ with no broke farma’s
It’s about time that prenups were considered.
Not just for farming circumstances.
Oops….
14 minutes later and 2 thumbs down.
Gold diggers on the scene already.
Lets have it readers❗️❗️
What is your objection to prenups❓
Ok…
I am a male and if I was confronted by a wealthy partner to sign a prenup I would have no issues with that.
It is a question of pride and circumstances.
My future wife might want to secure assets within her family.
These assets could be a family business which took a long time and hard work to obtain.
There are other legal means of financially securing your loved one.
Prenups should of course consider any children involved.
He ain’t gonna work on Maggie’s farm no more…
Will you get back to work
Cause Bob told him not to.
Antonov, where you have divorce , prenups are necessary,
It is disgraceful that the government is cow towing to farmers and actually contemplating this kind of legislation.
I hope turning the female sex into second second class citizens will see a strong reaction from the 50% of the electorate who will be affected and made second class citizens with reduced human rights.
i am sick of this government pandering to the wishes of the wealthiest people in the community.
“Speaking on Today with Seán O’Rourke, ICMSA president John Comer said the current legal situation results in “ambiguity of the highest order” – and not just for farmers.”
So funny.
Since when did farmers give two f*cks about anybody but farmers.?
It’s simply a matter of defining what is and what is not “matrimonial property” and forget about per ups or legislation. Prenups cater for all property owned solely or jointly by the parties or acquired by either of them during the course of the marriage and I would argue up to the date of effective separation or non cohabitation .
Let’s deal with principles and fairness here (especially in relation to the emotive issue of family farms).
Family farms (or indeed any such assets handed down from previous generations) should automatically be classed as being out with the definition of “matrimonial property” given that neither party to the marriage did anything to contribute to the acquisition of the asset due solely to their status of being married. Rather, the value in such assets has been accumulated over the years by other hard working family members.
In Scots law all property by way of “gift or succession” is totally excluded from the definition of matrimonial assets for division on divorce. Instead, the assets for such division are those “acquired during the course of the marriage by either of the parties (or in contemplation of marriage) but before the relevant date (of separation)”
This is much fairer than the situation in Ireland which is so pernicious it even allows for EX SPOUSES to come back for another bite of the cherry if circumstances dictate.
Totally agree
I know of a farmer who married and it only lasted a week and then the woman his wife wanted everything from him in the divorce. Good job his mother owned the farm then…
So what new legislation do farmers want ,in respect of their children,when they beget offspring from a so called “golddigger” when the marriage fails.?
I know a woman who was strung along for years by a big farmer who only wanted to have his cake and eat it,and when she realized he had no intention of marrying her, she had to go and look for a decent life-partner from the non farming community.
rubbish
to Sands
Sean you get good and bad in everything but a wedding only lasting a week as I described only proves she was a golddigger?
Rasher it did happen and was in Louth, why do you not think there are weirdos out there who would do anything for a buck?
Of course we’ll have prenups in no time. Now that women are earning just as much or more than men, there’s no reason not to have them.Why farmers think they should have additional protections not afforded to anyone else is ridiculous. Prenups all round.
Yeah surely his applies to anyone in business and not just farmers.
Yellin we want pre nup, we want pre nup! It’s something that you need to have when she leaves your ass she gonna take the calves..18 years 18 years…
This should have been brought in with the divorce referendum. It was always going to be an issue.
If they love you for life then it won’t be a problem signing it.
And if he does not love her for life, tough shit-for her.!
The SC interpreted that our Constitution meant that there could be no clean break divorce and effectively gave women “a second bite of the cherry” in rulings made subsequent to the divorce referendum. These consequences were ignored by Shatter while he was in Justice.
If the Irish Judiciary can load Irish Family Law in the way they did, can we expect to see farms remaining intact but being transferred entirely to the wife under this legislation?
You’d have to ask to before they enacted anything…
thats why there is a stipulation put in saying that if he abuses her or cheats on her she gets 50/50 ot put a timeliine on it 10-15 years
… Under a “no fault” divorce regime?
Sure all farmers are broke
That’s what I thought
money is short, but golddiggers are fully aware of the value locked up in land and assets…
Sick of people dissing the gold diggers. WTF did the Hoffmans do to deserve this?
Don’t hassle the Hoffmans
Prenuptial agreements apply to any type of person or property not just farmers obviously. It merely regulates what happens on divorce and citizens should be free to regulate their own assets in ways that suit them instead of always looking back to the State or worse the Church. All contracts by their bilateral nature are made to be broken as one party clearly cannot be trusted to adhere to their contractual obligations. If I am in a business partnership I can have a deed of partnership or allow the Partnership Act to dictate so WTF can I not have a mutual agreement drawn up with the benefit of legal advice on both sides that regulates what happens to my property and in the case of a farm my family’s property should my spouse bugger off with the milkman or we just tire if each other ?
Why should spouses exit a marriage with assets they made no contribution to acquiring ?
It’s different if it’s a long marriage and the spouse has contributed to the running of the farm or the improvement of the farmhouse etc. then the farmer must compensate his/her spouse for their efforts. In addition, I would argue that a woman who gives up her career to raise children and who has suffered an economic disadvantage should have that reflected in the divorce settlement .
People who suspect they are marrying a gold digger are more likely to get a prenup and some of them are bound to be correct so that’s going to add bias to the stats. People who have a specific asset that they want to protect (farmers) are likely to be slightly different to the norm which will include 60 year old, recent lotto winners who marry a 25 year old and surprises surprise get both a prenup and a divorce.
If I suspected the silly bint was a gold digger, I wouldn’t be giving her the time of day to begin with…
I thought farmers didn’t make any money..? hmmmm
Farmers probably think a pre nup is an EU Grant.
Farmers have gold now??
Well that’s what they keep telling us!
Reminds me of when Paul McCartney and his wife Heather split up, she got the gold mine and he got the shaft.
are these the poor cratur farmers who are always complaining that there’s no money to be made from farming?
Prenups aren’t legally binding in Ireland?
Well who knew.
The legal profession and anybody who asked?
Nope.
After looking at the photo of yar wan in the car…….I’m off to buy a farm!
Pre-nups are not legal because you can not enter a contract that contemplates the break up of a marriage.
For my six cents on this matter, I would bring in a total ban on inheriting farm land.
Let all land go back on the open market.
I personally think all property on death should be taken by the government, to be redistributed to the most needy.
Why should parasites feel automatically entitled to assets someone else spent their life working to acquire?
@rsdowney
that would complete discourage from anybody making serious progress on their land . If you decide, for example, to take out a €300k loan to make improvements e.g new parlour,drainage etc , it’ll prob take 30 years to pay it off.
That’s your legacy to your offspring pref son to continue to work and improve the land. Forced open market farms will bring down the price of land (more on market every year) but no incentive to improve it.
“I personally think all property on death should be taken by the government. Parasites should feel automatically entitled to assets someone else spent their life working to acquire” FTFY ;)
The Bull McCabe might be up for a debate on this important issue!
Eeerr….Mer Curial, maybe the owner of the property wants to pass all the fruits of their hard work to their children……because they care.
she’s flying around with handbrake fully up. Can’t buy driving skills☺
Not to mention the blurry building in the background. Who designs such a monstrosity LOL.
Simple, put farms in family trusts or transfer farms to children with burdens with farmers only having a life interest rather then absolute interest in a farm.
A man has nothing if he has no land
“will ya come into the field, Bridie.
Should that not be “spud diggers”?
“Don work no more wid dat big fat wooman”
This is why they can’t find wives!
have your say