Jump to content
BANGKOK
habuspasha

How about "common law" marrieds reunited?

Recommended Posts

All the Thai girls who I have met over the years who were previously married did so without documents, they just had the party and considered themselves married. But then, they didn't need to keep presenting piles of documents at immigration like we do.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Zealand has common law marriage after a couple have lived together for two years.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removed a troll post (unintelligible)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, natway09 said:

Basically because you may have some huge responsibilities back home with a wife

The judge was referring to a "settlement" & had ascertained that the relationship in this context ONLY 

was applicable. In this situation only he is right.

You may be surprised to learn that any land & houses we purchesed together , although in my

partners name cannot be sold without my approval & signture (as long as I am alive)

which is why I sleep alone behind locked doors 555 & cook for myself

I'm not sure Natway understands this particular case, the details of which are easily googleable.  See https://scandasia.com/danish-man-wins-lawsuit-against-thai-wife-for-not-sharing-assets/ or https://www.thaiexaminer.com/thai-news-foreigners/2020/07/01/buriram-judge-justice-for-danish-man-thai-wife-relationship-breakdown/ among others.  The judge was a she, not a he.  She did not declare anything about this context "ONLY."  She wouldn't have to since, as the same sources indicate, judicial decisions short of the Supreme Court do not establish precedent.  But she did not only settle a disagreement, she also (contrary to what another poster wrote) issue a judgment that the couple's relationship of a year or two was a common law marriage.  Now, it is true that Thai marriage law does not now accept common law marriages.  But as a couple of the articles indicate, this decision might open other litigants to ask that their common law arrangement be accepted as marriage for the purpose of other benefits.  In addition to the distribution of property in a divorce, why couldn't these include entry to the kingdom when the goal is reuniting a family or separated spouses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess not easy to determine good guys from bad guys...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2020 at 8:18 AM, habuspasha said:

"In law and government, de jure describes practices that are legally recognised."  The judge recognised it.  While de jure is distinguished from de facto, it is not limited to the letter of the law or legislation.  It includes judicial interpretation.  Of  course Covid 19 has nothing to do with whether or not a common law marriage should be legally recognised.  It is, or has been.  It could be now as Thailand seeks to reunite families as well.

Well, how are you supposed to prove without any doubt in writing to the Thai authorities,read Thai embassies in the world, that the relationship should be seen as a "common law marriage" when tens of thousands of Thai girls have more than one bf (when checking incoming money to their bank accounts)? Are friends and family supposed to be witnesses? Do you need to have kids or have stayed in Thailand a certain amount of years?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

Well, how are you supposed to prove without any doubt in writing to the Thai authorities,read Thai embassies in the world, that the relationship should be seen as a "common law marriage" when tens of thousands of Thai girls have more than one bf (when checking incoming money to their bank accounts)? Are friends and family supposed to be witnesses? Do you need to have kids or have stayed in Thailand a certain amount of years?  

All problems to be worked out, as in any administrative policy.  But I would say you ask for a signed declaration by each that they consider themselves married to each other, maybe an additional family or friend statement, evidence of cohabitation, shared finances or support.  None of that is exceptional.  And few things are proved "without any doubt."  The preponderance of evidence should be enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

There is again someone who expects logic.

Don't expect logic in Thailand. There is no logic!

After you understand this simple principle life will be a lot easier.

There is logic.. common law marriage is just an acceptance of two people living together for more than 12 months so they have some rights if/when the occasion arises that a decision has to be mage about property/possessions etc.

However if you do not have a registered marriage certificate as far as immigration goes and the rights that go with that you are not married legally !

Common law co- habitation is not a loop-hole to get around obtaining visa's.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Mrs heart sank when I showed her that story a few weeks back. 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kingstonkid said:

Common law is not considered a marriage in any country.  It is a relationship that has usually lasted 12 months of continuous co habitation.

 

Therefore it is not recognized by any immigration in any country.

Australia recognized my spouse when i applied from the uk for a permanent visa. affidavit's from our parents and our friends, of our ongoing loving relationship (20+ years). She dumped me after 6 yrs in OZ and still lives there. :cheesy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Important, it's not only "don't sign the paper and you aren't married".

 

I heard from two independent farangs that they had a marriage ceremony at the village temple with their Thai girlfriend but no official marriage certificate. Nothing signed.

And later pictures from those ceremonies were used to prove that they were married and that they should get divorce payments.

I am no lawyer and I don't know the legal situation but it seem this is a possibility. So be careful even if you don't sign anything. 

 

The village ceremony is entirely religious and to save face.

It doesn't prove you are legally married.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Andycoops said:

The village ceremony is entirely religious and to save face.

It doesn't prove you are legally married.

Are you sure?

Because in two cases I know pictures of that ceremony were used as prove they were married so that the women got divorce payments.

I don't know how common that is and the exact legal situation. But I know it happens. So better think about this might happen.

 

Nothing signed, no ceremony = no problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removed a troll post (unintelligible)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...