Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help

Help in Homework
trustpilot ratings
google ratings


Homework answers / question archive / Main points to answer this? Answer to mainly use case law to support, but legislation is also useful Ronald Chan is a very wealthy property developer, who owns a large construction company in Melbourne

Main points to answer this? Answer to mainly use case law to support, but legislation is also useful Ronald Chan is a very wealthy property developer, who owns a large construction company in Melbourne

Business

Main points to answer this? Answer to mainly use case law to support, but legislation is also useful Ronald Chan is a very wealthy property developer, who owns a large construction company in Melbourne. After separating from his wife of 30 years, Chan befriended a young Kenyan lady, Natalie Awiri, living in Nairobi, online via a dating app, in July of 2018. Natalie was only 25 years old, from a relatively poor family, and had only completed high school education. She only had a basic grasp of the English language. Despite this, their relationship blossomed over the course of a year, and Chan decided that he was ready to begin a new life with Natalie. Natalie relocated to Melbourne in August of 2019, with the wedding set for January, 2020. In

December, 2019, only four weeks from the wedding day, Chan told Natalie that they needed to

visit his lawyer to sign an agreement, explaining to Natalie that if she did not agree to signing

the documents, that the wedding would not go ahead. The following day Chan took Natalie to a

different lawyer to view the agreement. The lawyer advised Natalie at that time that she

should not sign the agreement, because it would provide little benefit to Natalie if she were to

divorce Chan. Natalie, being far away from her country and family for the first time in her life,

felt that she had no choice but to sign the agreement; especially with the wedding now only a

matter of days away, all her immediate family arriving in Melbourne in the coming days, and

some 300 guests invited for the wedding. She signed the agreement and the wedding went

ahead. Six months into the marriage, their relationship has now broken down, and Natalie has

come to you for advice on the validity of the pre-nuptial agreement. She reveals to you that she

also signed a similar document three weeks into her marriage with Chan, after he locked her in

a room and threatened not to let her out unless she signed.

 

Advise Natalie.

Please use case law to support your answer

Purchase A New Answer

Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts

GET A QUOTE