Two Lawyers spend all their money fighting each other through the divorce courts.

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by bokkatankie, Sep 19, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Mate, this isn't the first time that people who should know better have utterly destroyed themselves because neither wanted to be seen to back down. I'd put money on both of their legal teams having warned them against lengthy litigation. At the end of the day, the litigations teams will fight your case for you if you decide that you don't want to pursue an alternate route to resolving your dispute. They may as well, as if you don't pay them, you'll only pay someone else. Bloody mindedness, nothing more, nothing less.
  2. And people wonder why legal aid has been withdrawn for family disputes. I destroyed my ex's solicitor in court, she got the senior partner. Destroyed him, she got a barrister, destroyed him, she now has a thing matter how much tax payers money is thrown at it, the facts can not be changed.
  3. You're in the wrong job, matey. You could be earning squillions as a fat cat lawyer by the sound of it!
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Two lawyers wasting their money fighting each other in court. It doesn't get much better does it. Good thing NHI.
    • Like Like x 2
  5. No mate. I read the law, know your enemy see, but its documentary evidence. I now have a barrister as I need the help for my sons and to ensure the case is fair. I know how the judiciary and advocates work. Its like the senior officers promotion in the forces. A lot of 'jobs for the boys' club.

    I would like to practice law but I'm a peasant and cant afford to study. (yet!)
  6. Stick to barrack-room lawyering. You appear to have a knack for talking pish and making it up as you go along.
  7. I'd prefer to call it talent, so you may have to wait rather a long time to gain admission.
  8. Judge Million...
    Tell me he got the case on purpose, just for a wind up?
  9. So how much of your childrens education and future (and your own) have you spent fighting a fight that should have been settled over a cup of tea and a modicum of common sense? And who, in all those persons you have destroyed have you also enriched?
  10. Point taken. An outdated and incorrect comparisson. Senior Civil Service maybe but you know what I mean.

    Back on topic. There is nothing the courts can resolve that mediation can not do better other than enforcement and even that is a bit of a long shot in many cases.
  11. Sounds like neither party wanted to give an inch. Obviously too much animosity and a complete failure of common sense. Sitting opposite each other and calmly working though a fair and equal settlement was beyond them.

    The argument "Wife gave up a promising career in order to have the children" is a fair one if she is now on a lower salary and career position than she would normally expect to be. In most cases women will happily take a drop in salary/position to complete their family knowing they have financial back up from their other half who has the uninterrupted work term. The problem occurs when there is a relationship split and the settlement does not take into consideration what one party may have lost through division of labour. Loss of career prospect, salary and pension contributions can be tough to swallow when you are the only one facing it and your (now ex) other half is less inclined to acknowledge the inequality.