Marital Property is simply defined as any property acquired by one spouse, or both spouses, during the subsistence / existence / pendency of their marriage.
Most TV programmes, social media activists, counsellors and non-lawyers are of the view that once there is a divorce, any marital property should be shared 50:50 or equally among the couple. This view is however erroneous and not supported by law.
By law, the Constitution requires that marital properties are distributed equitably, not equally.
What is equitable is what is fair, just and a reasonable representation of the contribution by each spouse towards the acquisition of the marital property. So equity demands that the courts give to each spouse the portion they are entitled, but not equal portions necessarily.
The law therefore requires that in the distribution of marital property, what we should be interested in, is how much each spouse contributed towards its acquisition. It is on the basis of their contributions that a fair decision can be made on whether to share the property equally or otherwise.
Whilst the men are normally required to make substantial financial contribution towards the acquisition of the marital property, some women may be deemed to have made some contributions, just by virtue of their performance of house chores and/or having sexual intercourse with their husbands.
Not every woman can benefit from the chores and sex with the husband. In the wisdom of the courts, there is a vast difference between a working wife, who has the capacity to make substantial financial contribution, and a wife who is not capable, for reasons that she is unemployed or a house wife.
The wife who is unemployed or incapable of making financial contribution towards the acquisition of the property benefits from the performance of house chores and having sex with her husband.
There are a lot of cases where the courts have distributed marital properties equitably in the ratio of 10%:90%, 40%:60%, 30%:70%, 50%:50% (equally), and so on.
There are also cases where the courts have equitably denied a wife of any portion or percentage in a marital property acquired solely by her husband, on the ground that she failed to make substantial financial contribution towards its acquisition, when in fact she had the means and capacity to.
So depending on how much each spouse contributes, the man may be entitled to 90% and the woman 10%, the man 20% and the woman 80%, the man 100% and the woman 0%, and the law will still deem the distribution as equitable.
Depending on their contributions, equal share may be equitable in some circumstances; Equitable does not mean 50:50; Equitable does not mean equal.
As a working wife, capable of financially supporting your husband, always make sure that you contribute financially towards the acquisition of every martial property, however small, to secure yourself an interest or portion in the property.
Great explanations.
Very insightful and educative.
The Constitution under Article 22 has made it clear by the use equitable.
In Mensah v. Mensah the Supreme Court defined Equality as equitable and in
Atta v. Atta the court used equitable to distribute the property based on what each one contributed.
Grateful Sir
Exactly so Mr. Greg
Very educative. I have learnt a lot from this script. Equity and equality are the terms.
We are glad
It’s very good to be educated now or never, thanks for educating
We are glad
When a husband building a house without any financial support from his wife but the wife is aware of the property within the existence of the marriage. Then there is a devorce will the wife have a share in the property?
Yes, the wife will have a share. The question to ask is how much share will the wife have? the wife’s share will depend on how much she contributed to the building, not only in financial terms but also her performance of house chores and things she does to make the man feel happy and okay in the marriage, which must have enabled him to financially put up the building.