Re: Beckfoot - heir apparent


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Previous # Next ] [ Start New Thread ] [ TarBoard ]

Posted by Peter H on November 25, 2002 at 22:31:28 from 213.122.50.70 user Peter_H.

In Reply to: Re: Beckfoot - heir apparent posted by Prue Eckett on November 25, 2002 at 20:27:57:

Sorry, Prue, but your knowledge of UK property law is over 100 years out of date. 'On marriage, Bob would have taken over Molly's property rights' - oh no he wouldn't, because of the Married Woman's Property Act 1881. Since that Act, married women can own and dispose of property in exactly the same way as unmarried women.

The habit, if there was one, of giving a male's occupation in a will and not a female's, is utterly irrelevant. It had no effect at all on the ownership of property. It merely reflected social attitudes at the time, and is now utterly defunct.

Maybe the old law is still going in NZ? What was that old joke about a plane nearing NZ and the pilot advising all passengers to put their watches back 50 years . . .?


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
Eel-Mail:

Existing subject (please edit appropriately) :

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

post direct to TarBoard test post first

Before posting it is necessary to be a registered user.


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TarBoard ]

Courtesy of Environmental Science, Lancaster

space