Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Herpes Look Like A White Line

NOT BE RETURNED TO-Law MONEY RECEIVED FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE HOUSE ...

With the separation of the couple's former in-laws can say goodbye to the money they had given her daughter to help purchase the home.
The Supreme Court ruled in no uncertain terms, that the aid money from parents for the marriage of their children covered "in a context of family solidarity that is assumed free." So then if that investment on the future of the couple reveals, "bankruptcy" can not claim restitution.
So the judges of the Third Civil Division of the Supreme Court, in its 8386 ruling, has upheld a decision of the Court of Appeal of Milan, which had rejected the request of her parents, after separation from her husband, to get back that 18 million in the '90s represented a contribution to the purchase of the marital home. More
"Solomon" was in 2002, the Lombard court that he had instead accepted in part the request of former in-laws condemning the former husband to return at least € 7000.
After the defeat in the second degree in-laws "generous" have appealed to the Supreme Court but the Court stated che "è costume diffuso, nell'attuale società, che i genitori aiutino anche finanziariamente i figli al momento del loro matrimonio, in un contesto di solidarietà familiare che si presume gratuito".
La sentenza della Cassazione tuttavia indica una "via d'uscita", a beneficio di futuri suoceri che volessero evitare il rischio di perdere in un sol colpo denaro e genero: la restituzione sarebbe obbligatoria se ci fosse un documento dal quale risulta che si trattava di un prestito, con tanto di indicazione su tempi e modalità di restituzione.
Insomma, è vero che la solidarietà familiare è importante, ma qualche clausola di salvaguardia non sarebbe vietata." -->

0 comments:

Post a Comment