Mother, 33, whose 'dominating' older partner, 53...

>Mother, 33, whose 'dominating' older partner, 53, refused to marry her 'in case someone better came along' is handed his £1million property after a judge rules she was denied the financial security of a wife
>Kirsty Cahill, 33, had three children with property developer Stephen Farrer
>Court heard she was 'besotted' and 'wholly dependent' on him financially
>But he refused to marry despite once pretending to propose to Ms Cahill
>Judge now ruled she be given a £1million investment property he bought


dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3697455/Mum-awarded-property-judge-rules-denied-security-wife.html

Just a filthy jew plot to earn money (through court/lawyer scheme), destroy nuclear family, and prevent whitey from having kids while nignogs plop out 9 each.

Here we see a win 1D chess, a game long forgotten.

lmfao

this is the only time I can say the woman was justified

seems like they deserve one another. who cares?

sage.

Nothing wrong with this unless it's my wifes children.

I would burn my properties to thd fucking ground before I ever let this happen. I would also assassinate the judge on his way into the courthouse.

Feminism is communist bullshit, alimony and child support ar Kike bullshit. This is what makes men go their own way. Honestly at this point women are fucking useless if you can't even date them without being the victim of theft.

Yeah justified cause of what? Her bullshit story?

hold your rage niggers, they're both fucktards but he bought the house in her name so the patriarchal court as always ruled in the favor of the guy, oh wait that never happens they ruled in the favor of the woman, because the cunt popped out 3 kids

also since when do judges decide what gender role a person must be in? since when do all vagina carrying human have a right to "the security of a wife"? what the fuck does that euphemism dven mean? that kike judge is going to die, just you wait.

kek

reading into the article, the cuck put the property in her name and made her the soul owner then tried to say its not binding because they're not married

cucks going to get cucked at the end of the cuck

>had three children with property developer Stephen Farrer
Even animals understand you're married by this point.

>>But he refused to marry despite once pretending to propose to Ms Cahill

Yet he had three fucking kids with her.

In this case, the guy is 100% in the wrong.

My dad is in the same situation right now. I want him to be happy and if his money is pulling 20 year old ass at 62 then good for him but he's been with the latest girl (who he met on seeking arrangement, site for sugar daddies) for 2 years now and says he loves her and that she loves him. I just can't see this ending well but there is nothing I can do and I know it's not my place or right to interfere anyways. All I can do is hope he's right about her I guess.

This is when you dunp her and let her rot

She knew there wasn't going to be a marriage and she could cease living with him at any time. Where is the illicit deed? On what grounds did the judge take away his property? No one can under no circumstances be obliged to get married, it's somewhere in the European Convention of Human Rights, so how can someone be punished because he 'denied her the financial security of a wife'. Even this sentence is stupid. He didn't deny her anything, she had the right to marry anyone else and obtain the financial security of a wife.
It is true that his methods, of making children outside of a marriage degenerate, but she did the same, nobody should lose anything.

He bought the house in her name only.

...

there is a lot you can do for your skookum grandpa!

when one of those brain dead cunts commits paternity fraud against him, just kill her. stab her in the eyesocket with a butter knife, get in their good and deep! twist it around and basically skull fuck her eye socket with the knife.

her body will seize for a few moments but she will die very quickly regardless of convulsions.

always put the remains in the septic. have you ever heard of a cop diving into a septic tank to look for human remains? that is because they dont do that. even a single family home will deposit hundreds of animal and plant dna into the greywater, as well as a dozen pairs of human dna because of visitors and card games.

just fucking man up and kill her. any fucking moron can do this, it is not complicated.

It couldn't have been a donation as he made it clear that she was just a fuck slut. it is something common to do so in order to avoid fiscal authorities. The state was prejudiced, not her. She didn't put a penny in buying that house.

Common law marriage concept. Has been around for ages. Nothing new. Move along.

If you have 3 kids with someone and spent a long part of your life together, yep, you basically founded a legal partnership which, once untangled, also has consequences for the commonly used assets.

Out of wedlock relation is against sharia. In this case either woman should be stoned to death or considered married to the man. Court decided that the second case is correct.

>yfw people will soon have ask their potential future partner to sign a legal document on their first date to protect themselves against future bankruptcy

Doesn't matter. Putting her on the title makes her the de facto owner of the property, regardless of the reasons why

All this could have been avoided if he wasn't "avoiding fiscal authorities"

>meet a girl
>have 3 kids with her
>don't marry

Sounds like he's the degenerate one here, imo.

>fuck chads
>get stoned
why is islam so degenerate

How in the fuck is that legal?

so because she agreed to consensual unprotected sex, he now must give her his property. way to go, glad to see womyn standing on their own two feet and not allowing men to be given responsibility over womyn's reproductive decisions.

>use someone else's name to avoid taxes or similar
>mad when they want they legally own
>she only did this after he strung her along

I hate women and this is surprisingly reasonable

The fact that she had 3 of his kids kind of makes me say it's alright.

If the role was reversed, will the man gets a million pounds property? If answer is yes, then it's a OK ruling.

the guy fucked up

Of course he is wrong about her but what's he gonna do?

He can either remain unfucked and unloved (pretend or not) until he's dead, or he can blow his money on a sweet illusion.

>he bought the house in her name
I don't know what he expected.

still feels like she was just hanging around for the allowance money and waiting to pounce

I think the real loser here is the cuckaluckadingdong who will have to raise their kids.

>Buy a house
>Put it under a chicks name
>Have no legal contract with that chick, marrige or otherwise

This is like me going up to a stranger, having a notary record that I am GIVING HIM 100k. Then later going to court to try and get it back. My only defense being "I didn't really MEAN it when I gave him the money"

This only works in places with common law marriages. The problem is, the judge ruled he denied her "the financial security of a wife" which was on purpose and legal. The judges remarks are completely outside the scope of his authority, he has no power over "humiliation" or any kind of social justice, he's supposed to administer the law.

This should also put the woman in a very precarious position because if he DID gift her the house, then she didn't pay taxes on it. The judge is saying she committed TAX FRAUD, the man could fuck her over real good by reporting it to authorities.

This. That guys is an asshole.

if they were married yeah, but they werent

fuck it. unload the bitch and shell be broke in two years time. worth every penny if you ask me. He loved her he just wasnt gonna marry her

It was in her name, just her name, he just payed for it. It was already legally hers.

He bought her a million pound investment as a gift and tried to steal it back when she dumped him.

The moral of this story is don't buy someone an expensive gift and expect to get it back.

This

Why the fuck would he put it in her name? What a retard

I kind of agree. Security for the mother is security for the kids.