Posted on 12/05/2011 8:10:28 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
A Frenchman has been ordered to pay his ex-wife £8,500 in damages for failing to have enough sex with her during their marriage.
The 51-year-old man was fined under article 215 of France’s civil code, which states married couples must agree to a “shared communal life”.
A judge has now ruled that this law implies that “sexual relations must form part of a marriage”.
The rare legal decision came after the wife filed for divorce two years ago, blaming the break-up on her husband’s lack of activity in the bedroom.
A judge in Nice, southern France, then granted the divorce and ruled the husband named only as Jean-Louis B. was solely responsible for the split.
But the 47-year-old ex-wife then took him back to court demanding 10,000 euros in compensation for “lack of sex over 21 years of marriage”.
The ex-husband claimed “tiredness and health problems” had prevented him from being more attentive between the sheets.
But a judge in the south of France’s highest court in Aix-en-Provence ruled: “A sexual relationship between husband and wife is the expression of affection they have for each other, and in this case it was absent.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
BING!
Did she supply proof of multiple non-occurrences? Proving a negative can be tricky, you know ...
Hmmm, there might be a case for considering foreign court decision precedents after all.
I hope this catches on...and works both ways. There are countless men that could use this judgement to their advantage.
Gallic Ping.
"You're not going to believe this, Klatu."
"We're historians, Zandu, our job is to report what happened, even during long past times of barbarism, not judge it. Read it."
"Okay Klatu: 'A Frenchman has been ordered to pay his ex-wife £8,500 in damages for failing to have enough sex with her during their marriage. ...a judge in the south of France’s highest court in Aix-en-Provence ruled: 'A sexual relationship between husband and wife is the expression of affection they have for each other, and in this case it was absent.'"
"What?"
"That's what the ancient legal ruling read, Klatu."
"That can't be right, Zandu. You can't adjudicate affection as a contractual obligation. Why, the very definition of the word places it outside of adjudication, and the judge would surely know that. What did these barbarians think law is? For that matter, what did they think lovemaking is?"
"You said we weren't supposed to judge, Klatu."
"Oh shut up, Zandu. No wonder these people weren't allowed into the rest of the galaxy, they were insane."
Give the guy a possible break, some women are just not hittable, face it........
No Helen Thomas pics, please.........
I wonder ... can we add up all the headaches and other miscellany and have a case under French law ?
No money, honey?
We can .. um ... work it out, y'know.
Did she maintain some sort of chart tallying the frequency of “encounters?” Was the tally broken down by the frequency of nookie each month, week, what? Did quickies count?
A guy just can’t win in this world..gotta pay to get it, gotta pay to not get it.
As the Brits would say, “Well bugger me!”
Speaking of tallies, it looked like the man’s “tallywacker” wasn’t working so well.
If this kind of thinking works both ways my ex wife would owe me a rather substantial sum.
They get you coming and going...
In socialism, the government is expected to intrude into every facet of a person’s life. What’s next? Supervised conjugal visits?
And going and coming...
(And always too soon!)
/”Blazing Saddles” Teutonic Tramp
 |
INDUSTRIAL STRENGTH HUMOR |
| No amateurs, please. Send FReepmail if you want on/off ISHP list |
|
| The List of Ping Lists | |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.