Divorce in Poland - fault - rights to property predating the marriage

A technical subject. Detailed knowledge of Polish law required.

Man owns property before marriage.

Man marries and has 2 children with his wife.

Husband cheats on wife and has a child with another woman (at the same time as his wife miscarries).

Wife's claim to the property? Does she have any?

She has no claim to what he owned before marriage.

As far as I recall, continental, european law (all that is not anglo saxon, meaning UK and US) says that everything earned in marriage should be divided either in half, or modified to some extent, to match closer incomes during marriage. Wife can claim up to half of everything that man earned during that period (inheritance doesn't count)

I like anglosaxon law, it seems that they protect the female side better legally. Divorce should be expensive.

Everything that they entered marriage with stays their own property. what was his before marriage remains his. Or hers.

And for the person who committed this crime, and psychopathically hurt his family the only adequate punishment is castration.

The question of maintenance and claim arrives only on the event of divorce. You could make an agreement/contract to x amount of PLZ per month and not get divorced, a wise man would then liquidate his assets after the agreement/contract is signed.

'a man has a property before marriage' - you MUST be able to prove this, by documented evidence, this applies to anyone with 'assets' before marriage.

Not being judgemental towards you but how common is it for polish man to have extra affair outside marriage like you did....

Ukangel,I would think that it would be no more or no less than any other kind of men.

What do u mean by that?

I think the moderator means......why do you think that Polish men are different.....or even how dare you suggest that Polish men are different....or even please document your theory that Polish men are different to other european/worldwide men and in what way. They are just guys like the rest of us. or did I misunderstand and confuse this argument entirely, probably by missing posts?

Angel, don't try to make it "Polish Men". That would be unfair and unrealistic. [EDIT: As dread beat me to saying . :) ] Cheaters are cheaters regardless of nationality. That is what P3 was getting at. If you are looking for assurance that your Polish man is a keeper this would not be the thread to do it >_<

And OP didn't as yet say that it was himself. It would be moot to ask Var ..if I remember comments few of his posts, it is the wife that is Polish anyway.

So another line to question... that 'preowned' property was in Poland or elsewhere?
Inherited (which can give most weight but sometimes court may decide the kids are next in line early depending on the scope of asset)?
And was she needed at the time to buy it even if they were not yet married?
Did she invest in improvements?

Though I am no atty... I would venture to say it does not look sunny for your friend.
I can't see how owning it matters in the end in this case as presented.
Unless Poland is radically different, here even in podunk , man-friendly States south?
If the wife with two kids miscarried through the personal upset of his having got another woman pregnant at same time (and that IS how any good atty will word it for her,even if subjective-? bad timing is bad) and he tries to divorce her at that time or after to boot? They will bite such a big chunk of his assets for maintaince(aka alimony) and child support it doesn't matter who owns it on paper. Having kids can nullify most Pre-nups even, unless it had specific and detailed provisions concerning.

Plus this "property" it is a home that the woman and children live in.. ? most courts will not just give them the keys to the street overnight. He'll need a top shark in this bloodpool.Which also costs. And arrange his schedule to accomodate a session with the most neutral judge in is region.

Opinion basis: NOT ATTY or currently working in field - 4 years as paralegal in US States of WA and AZ

You did not make it clear whether the pre-owned property was the one in whcih the wife and children currently live. If this is the case - you can 'wave goodbuy' to any notion of pre-owning it. She is entitled to half, as she has worked and contributed to the house during the time she was having children, whilst you were 'playing away'

If it is another property - one that you rent out - (which is what I assumed above) then it is ok - as long as the wife and children remain in the marital home.

A good solicitor will tell you that you have to buy her out - i.e. give her half the value of the house, but until the time that children finish their education (i.e. leave university), she has a right to remain in the home. High price to pay for a 'bit on the side'. Not only that, but you ewill have to pay for the children and your new partners earnings (if she is working) will be taken into account when calculating child support.

The wife has lived in the property owned by the husband since they got married ten years ago.

oh just throw her out Varsovian if she has served her purpose, that is what u want to do, isnt it?
what does her miscarriage have to do with it?

The size of the property claim depends on how long they've been married. Assuming there's no pre-nup. Ten years is enough to have quite a big claim indeed. The threshold dates and percentages are specified precisely under the law.

No pre-nup. Do you have any references to threshold dates and percentages?
Would be grateful.

I remember one half of a couple I knew who were divorcing getting worried about a threshold round about the three-year mark which affected the percentage the ex-spouse would be entitled to. The house and land was a substantial family estate held in his name that his family were worried his spouse would have a claim on however it was a while ago and my memories are vague about it all. I remember that crossing one threshold meant the ex would get half rather than a third. This was some years ago and the law may well have changed. Nor was I paying much attention to what they were telling me at the time - too much information from them really.

Worth mentioning though that the person in question was a lawyer so would presumably have had accurate information, though the website below seems to contradict what I remember.

The link below mentions ten years in relation to accrued gains in property value during the marriage.
coupleseurope.eu/en/poland/topics/5-what-are-the-consequences-of-divorce-separation

You would think they could afford someone to translate it a bit better than this.
From what I can gather, the wife will CERTAINLY be entitled to half of the increased value of the property since purchase. I would not take that as gospel, and also someone would have to value the property now (better get something organized now) and then assess the increase.

However, as she has children, she will stay in the house and not onyl that, but unless the man has a 'really good' lawyer, he will end up paying the bills for the house.

OK - so all you lot were absolutely useless in giving help. After going to a divorce lawyer, you get to know that all advice on this forum is completely wrong!! Quite funny really. As close to reality as Fox News :)

That's probably why lawyers charge so much. Though it does beg the question why you bothered asking here in the first placeas well as showing you up to be rather rude and uncivilised to post like that and franky rather strange to return with a throwaway comment that a lawyer you visited two years later disagreed with an old discussion on a forum.

Happy divorcing, anyway.

They say no right but I know someone who had to give half.Anyway with kids alimony has to be paid.Lawyers charge heavily to save the property.

My understanding would be that the wife has a claim on no more than 50% of the increase in the value of the property but nothing more than that (and even then only if they didn't have separated assets). What did your lawyer tell you?

I plan on getting married and I have a property here in Poland. We plan on signing a prenup before marriage. Would my property be safe if anything (god forbid) happened and she wanted a divorce in the future?

If I'm not mistaken, everything you owned before the marriage, belongs to you after.

Thanks for the reply Looker. I will obviously go to a lawyer this week to ask.

Now I'm sure the lawyer will tell you exactly the same. According to the Polish Family and Guardianship Code (Art. 31, § 1)


Now my translation (sorry for the language)


and (Art. 33, p.1):



infor.pl/akt-prawny/304963,ustawa-kodeks-rodzinny-i-opiekunczy.html

Wow, thank you for doing the research!

I'll tell you what the lawyer says when I ask him.

Hi all, I would just add another spanner in the works re being part of the European Union. Thus it is every ones right to appeal a particular countries law if the law by the majority is see to be un fair or not fitting. This may be a way in which the mother can ask for 50% amd child support in and after the divorce proceedings.

Hey everyone,

I spoke to several lawyers from Krakow today and they said that property you purchase before marriage is indeed personal property and stays with you in case of divorce. Definitely if you sign an agreement like a prenuptial agreement.

Greetings,
WW

Remember , lawyers are very capable of twisting words , so be careful , just a scenario for you : "say you both live in your house as married couple , then kids come along , your family grows from 2 to 4 ...all of the sudden she wants to divorce you , she wins custody of both children and you have access to see them twice a week . You tell her and the kids to move out from your home right ?" Well ...hold on a second , why does single mother with 2 kids have to move out and live in "1bedroom condo" while you enjoy "300 square meter house" by yourself ? Is that fair? Her lawyer may ask .

Judges tend to take mother's and children side , and you never know what the decision might be .
Hope it never happens , but ...
Prenuptial agreement is the way to go .

So what did the lawyer say?