Yesterday, our lawyer represented a divorce case involving child support and the burden of maintenance at the Fengtai District Court in Beijing. In the end, the parties reached a divorce mediation agreement in court. However, a minor issue arose in the drafting of the divorce mediation document, namely whether the payment of child support needed to be clearly dated.
Originally, the presiding judge originally wanted to express this issue in the divorce mediation document as follows: "The daughter born in wedlock is raised by the plaintiff, and the defendant has paid 1,500 yuan per month for maintenance since June 2016." However, the judge next to him believes that the date of payment of maintenance should be specified, for example, it can be expressed as "1500 yuan of maintenance paid before the 15th of each month". Why would an adjudicator make such a suggestion? Is this question important? In this regard, this divorce lawyer believes that the judge's advice is not important. The reason is that although many judges are accustomed to drafting divorce judgments or mediation documents according to the judge's expression, the judge's statement in this case is also clear and specific enough. The judge's way of saying this is that the deadline for the monthly payment of child support is set at the last day of each month, so the concern of the judge next to him is unnecessary.
Beijing Divorce Lawyer - Marriage Lawyer - Divorce Lawyer Consultation
Although this was the case, the parties did not understand the law after all, and they were afraid that they would cause other troubles in the matter after the divorce because of this problem, so they immediately agreed after hearing the adjudicator's suggestion. Therefore, this lawyer also implores the presiding judge to clarify the date of the change. After all, the divorce mediation agreement should be subject to the opinions of the parties, as long as the content is not illegal, the presiding judge is not easy to refuse, and this is not a matter of principle. As a result, the presiding judge increased the specific time for the payment of maintenance - before the 15th of each month, in accordance with everyone's opinion.