Despite the cyclists` decision, the demand for law reform does not seem to disappear, as I mentioned in Baroness Hale`s decision in the case itself. We would see that complete and final legislation for all agreements would be considered by the majority as the best scenario, but that does not mean that it is the ultimate solution. The counter-argument of such regulation would be to exempt the parties from any decision of the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1973 and to base any decision on the Hyman/Radmacher framework, meaning that the Court of Justice could depart from any decision, depending on the circumstances of the parties at the time of the divorce, which means that it would guarantee the security and autonomy of the parties. Consider This comment by Baroness Hale in the Radmacher case. Should pre-marital agreements be taken into account in the event of divorce? The definition of a pre-marital agreement is: “An agreement reached by a couple before marrying on the property of their respective property if the marriage fails.” This seems to provide a safety net for both parties if the marriage fails, but it is not always the case. The main point of discussion of these agreements is when circumstances change and what should happen if they do. One of the talking points should be whether the circumstances should reasonably be unpredictable or not, as if the circumstances were foreseeable, whether this should leave room for the parties to plan their events in advance. The government`s 1999 proposals were strongly criticized when they stated that any agreement should be derogated at the birth of a child, since the agreement should not be derogated if it had caused such an event. If we take everything into account, if we increase the reasons for the repeal of the agreement, this leads to better economic protection for the weaker party, which means that we are taking away the high level of party security and autonomy, which means that it is less fair to the party that relied on the applicability of the agreement.
We`ll send you an example trial in two hours. If you need faster help, you can always use our custom writing service. Fairness is a key principle that must be taken into account, as it is difficult to understand why the Court of Justice would be better able to do what is right for them than the parties.