Article 1:136
in forceMarriage contract (huwelijkse voorwaarden) · Set-off clauses (verrekenbedingen) · § General provisions for settlement clauses
If an asset has been acquired by applying assets subject to set-off, the acquired asset shall be attributed to the assets subject to set-off in the proportion that corresponds to the part of the consideration applied from the assets subject to set-off at the time of acquisition divided by the total consideration. If a spouse (echtgenoot) has incurred a debt in connection with the acquisition of an asset, the asset shall, pursuant to the first sentence, be attributed to the assets subject to set-off to the extent that the debt is attributed thereto or has been redeemed or paid therefrom.
If a dispute exists between the spouses regarding the question of whether an asset is included in the assets to be set off, and neither of them can prove that the asset is included in the assets not to be set off, then that asset shall be designated as belonging to the assets to be set off. This presumption shall not operate to the detriment of the creditors of the spouses.
Indien een goed onder aanwending van te verrekenen vermogen is verkregen, wordt het verkregen goed tot het te verrekenen vermogen gerekend voor het aandeel dat overeenkomt met het bij de verkrijging uit het te verrekenen vermogen aangewende gedeelte van de tegenprestatie gedeeld door de totale tegenprestatie. Indien een echtgenoot in verband met de verwerving van een goed een schuld is aangegaan, wordt het goed op de voet van de eerste volzin tot het te verrekenen vermogen gerekend voor zover de schuld daartoe wordt gerekend of daaruit is afgelost of betaald.
Bestaat tussen de echtgenoten een geschil omtrent de vraag of een goed tot het te verrekenen vermogen wordt gerekend en kan geen van beiden bewijzen dat het goed tot het niet te verrekenen vermogen wordt gerekend, dan wordt dat goed aangemerkt als te rekenen tot het te verrekenen vermogen. Het vermoeden werkt niet ten nadele van de schuldeisers der echtgenoten.
Decisions of the Dutch Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) applying this article. Annotations are unofficial translations.
Law of Persons and Family Law. Matrimonial property law. Settlement of a contractual claw-back clause (verrekenbeding). Is it relevant for the application of Article 1:141 paragraph 1 and Article 1:136 paragraph 1 of the Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek) from which spouse the surplus (non-settled) income originated and in whose asset that income was invested? Intelligibility of the court of appeal's judgment in light of witness testimony.
Decision on rechtspraak.nlFamily law; divorce; petition for the determination of the extent of set-off obligations based on prenuptial agreements; Articles 1:136 paragraph 1, 141 paragraph 1 of the Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek); “investment theory” (beleggingsleer) regarding set-off clauses. Does a jointly entered mortgage loan, on which no principal has been repaid, entitle the husband to half of the surplus value of a property acquired privately by the wife? It is incorrect that the value (or increase in value) of private assets that were not acquired through the use of wealth saved from income and which remained undivided must be included in the set-off of surplus income at the dissolution of marriage if a periodic division of surplus income was omitted during the marriage. The fact that the mortgage loan was entered into jointly does not imply that the purchase price of the property was charged to the assets subject to the set-off obligation.
Decision on rechtspraak.nl