Arguing about the surplus value, while the judge only wants ‘bite-sized chunks’

After their divorce in 2019, they faced each other in court several times. Now Yolande has started summary proceedings against her ex-husband Raymond, because they cannot agree on the equity of a home to be divided.

On one side of the room is the father’s lawyer, who lives in Curaçao and is not attending the hearing. On the other side the mother. The teenage daughter sits at the back of the room.

Judge: “You think,” towards the mother, “that the house has an excess value of 128,00 euros. And you say,” to the father’s lawyer, “that the surplus value is 145,000 euros.” And then: “I see a lot of documents in the file, their importance is not entirely clear to me.”

Father’s lawyer: “That is to show that making normal and simple agreements with the lady is not possible, you understand?”

Judge: “First the facts. And we agree: if one speaks, the other keeps his mouth shut. That can be difficult.” Mother’s lawyer is on the edge of her seat. Father’s lawyer is sitting broadly relaxed. Mother stares straight ahead. The teenage daughter wiggles her leg.

Father’s lawyer: “My client states in his documents that his daughter is wealthy. This has to do with an inheritance.”

Mother’s lawyer: “This summary proceedings concerns the house. That legacy is separate from this.”

Judge: “We’ll start small.”

Valuation report

Father’s lawyer: “My client wants to pay what he has to pay. I sent like ten emails. We didn’t get what we wanted, you know?”

Judge: “What is the basis of your claim?”

Lawyer father: “That my client pays fairly what he has to pay.”

Judge: “That is no basis. I want bite-sized chunks. We have a valuation report here from the real estate agent that has been withdrawn. How so?”

Mother’s lawyer: “My client heard from the financial advisor that the report had been withdrawn. And sir” – she turns her head towards the other party – “doesn’t respond quickly either.”

Father’s lawyer: “The lady is responsible for the maintenance of the house, which is in ruins.”

Mother’s lawyer: “That report is from May. In October we were told that it was not good.”

Mother adds: “I thought I was almost done with it. He wants to destroy us.”

Father’s lawyer: “Madam should have maintained the house. That’s her obligation, you know?”

Mother lawyer: “Can I say something about that?”

Judge: “No, you are not allowed to do that.”

Mother’s lawyer: “Housing prices have now risen.”

Father’s lawyer: “The real estate agent we agreed on can do the valuation tomorrow, I can call him now.”

Mother: “Then it’s beyond my control, it makes me nervous.”

Judge: “The real estate agent you agreed with can do the valuation tomorrow, isn’t that nice?”

Mother: “The reference date for the home must be earlier.”

Judge: “I don’t want to look at the past, otherwise we would still be here tonight.”

The lawyer calls his client in the hallway. Outside the room, the lawyers continue bickering in whispers. Then they come back inside.

Judge: “I see heavy faces.”

Mother’s lawyer: “Sir wants to receive the alimony documents.”

Father’s lawyer: “My client wants to pay what he has to pay, no more, no less. He is a principled man.”

Mother: “Now he suddenly wants to pay more? I want it to stop!”

about RaymondRight To me it is irrelevant whether he is a sweetheart or not

Judge: “How fair is it to allow tensions in the family to exist? The procedure takes a turn.”

Mother: “He destroys his children!”

Judge: “For me it is irrelevant whether he is a sweetheart or not.”

Father’s lawyer: “I have to leave soon for my child’s ten-minute meeting.”

Judge: “I’ve been sitting here for an hour longer.”

Mother’s lawyer: “We will provide the papers.”

Judge: “The gentleman is released from the obligation of the mortgage. The surplus value is determined at 135,000 euros. Madam can choose the notary.”



Reading list



ttn-32