The issue we are discussing today does not concern a simulation

[mahbubamim077]

Of course, there are visceral distinctions between the areas (less so in the so-called business families ); but, looking at it from the opposite angle, there are common points, points of contact, analogous points. It is like a vegan meal and a barbecue party; despite being supposedly completely different, they share the same aspect of manufacturability. And that is fundamental. The dissolution of common assets is not exclusive to Family Law; it is inherent to Business Law, equally. It occurs in the liquidation of dissolved companies, in the dissolution of non-personified companies, in the undoing of partnership, consortium and similar contracts. What matters here are not feelings and emotions; what matters are values ​​with a pecuniary expression: money, assets and credits.

If we are not going to deal with corporate or business simulations, what bulk sms south africa new things could we bring to the debate regarding the division of the common assets of a couple who are divorcing or dissolving their civil union? The direct answer: we believe there is room for a discussion on the active patrimonial effect of acts of economic and financial abuse with negative repercussions on the marital assets.


This is not a common perspective in Family Law, but it is a reference for business associations that can be useful for correcting distortions in the duty of financial fiduciary that is typical of both corporations (business partnerships) and couples who have opted for some (total or partial) community of assets. More than that, it proposes a closer look at the management of marital assets, in a situation analogous to the proposal for good corporate governance: good governance of the collective association: collaboration (working together) and never abuse, never taking or treating as one's own what is collective, community, corporate, or marital.