I accept that the woman feared for her visa status if her marriage did not continue, and this issue was a reason for her when the agreement was signed. She didn`t want to go back to Russia like a loser, with a failed marriage… To cite just a few examples: a binding financial agreement may be cancelled for the following reasons: However, as soon as there is a valid, enforceable and effective form of legal contract (i.e. a “financial contract”) according to the legal requirements applied in accord with the principles of the treaty and fairness, the law provides for a number of requirements whose purpose is not “contractual” but rather to determine whether the 71A of the law is invoked or not. If Parliament had intended to play a role in this (distinct) inquiry, s 90KA would have drawn attention to the issue of the “liability” of an agreement. The circumstances that affect a party that may induce a court to refuse aid or cancel a transaction are very varied and cannot be satisfactorily classified. These include poverty or needs of any kind, illness, age, sex, body or mind disability, drunkenness, illiteracy or lack of education, lack of help or explanation where help or explanation is needed. The common feature seems to be that one party is at a serious disadvantage compared to the other. it is untenable for an oral or written execution or execution to have a more binding effect than a registered or non-registered written agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Family Act. The woman said she had no choice.
She was clearly in a position of particular disadvantages and the husband knew that. The marital agreement was not to the woman`s advantage. She did not give him any rights to her husband`s property in the future. She knew it was to her detriment, because Mr.C. had told her. She still signed it because she felt she had no choice. In such cases, the conclusions of the appropriate intent to be granted to the parties depend on the particular circumstances of the case. This material would not necessarily be limited to the original decision to reconcile the Court or, as in this case, to write to the Court. Their intention could crystallize over time and as the parties reconcile in a more precise form, and they live their lives together, including their financial affairs, so that it becomes incompatible with any other conclusion. (c) in addition to or instead of an order or order under paragraph (a) or b), the agreement or a particular part of the agreement may be applied as if it were a court order.