As a first step, pre-marital agreements were entered into for the payment of property rights and maintained in the event of proper financial disclosure.2 1972 in Posner/. Posner, 257 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1972), florida Supreme Court upheld a marital agreement, 3 In 1983, the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act (UPAA) was developed in response to concerns about inconsistency in the validity and application of these contracts at a time when the demand for pre-marriage agreements was increasing.425 states and the District of Columbia have adopted the UPAA. Although Florida was not yet one of them – but Florida is apparently closer than one might think. In order to codify the law in Florida, a version of the UPAA will be presented to the legislature in May 2007. Below is what The Florida version of the UPAA will be and how the material aspects of the law reflect Florida jurisprudence and can alter it and embody public order. Finally, in Tenneboe v. Tenneboe, 558 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 4. DCA 1990), the Tribunal struck down a transaction agreement on real estate reached two weeks after filing a divorce application on the basis of similar principles.
The court found that there was an overrun, where the husband, who was not represented by a lawyer, gave the woman the house and all the equity inside, the van, some lawyer`s fees, took over all the debts, and was made with $112.57 per week on which to live.36 In addition, there were concerns about the representations that the wife`s lawyer made to the husband with regard to his ability to subsistence and understanding the husband`s loyalty. Note that in all of these cases, the demanding part was not represented. While the law in Florida is very clear that the lack of legal assistance alone is not a reason for the cancellation of a transaction agreement37, grossly disproportionate distribution and other factors of injustice related to the lack of legal assistance have allowed the courts to terminate these agreements. There is sufficient evidence that an agreement is due to an unequal treatment of bargaining power or other circumstances, so that there has been no wise choice on the part of the disadvantaged Part 38, may very well lead to an overshoot that renders an agreement unacceptable. In addition to the finding that the pre-marriage agreement is unacceptable at the time of enforcement, it should also be noted that: However, the UPAA authorizes a waiver of financial disclosure.43 In Florida, advertising obligations are fulfilled when the spouse in question „has such general and approximate knowledge of [the other`s] ownership that [the spouse] can make an intelligent decision on the conclusion of the agreement.” 44 A list of accounts containing the values contained is sufficient.45 A list of holdings that reconciles the company`s revenues is sufficient – a party does not need to obtain a commercial valuation to comply with this requirement.46 The fact that the parties lived together for years prior to the conclusion of a marriage contract and that the agreement itself includes a timetable for the assets and commitments of the dominant party, or that a sworn financial insurance agreement will be signed to the agreement. An allegation of insufficient disclosure.47 The fact that the parties resided together for an extended period of time indicates that the litigant would reasonably have sufficient knowledge of the other party`s financial situation.