ຄວາມຫຼົງຕົວເອງ ແລະ ການແບ່ງແຍກຊັບສິນ: ພິສູດໃຫ້ເຫັນເຖິງການຫຼອກລວງໃນການຢ່າຮ້າງຂອງຊາວໂຮນລັງ

Dutch property law does not recognise narcissism as a legal category, and you do not need a diagnosis to obtain a remedy. What counts in the division of matrimonial assets is conduct the law already regulates: concealing or squandering assets, withholding financial information, and obtaining a signature by exploiting the other spouse’s dependence or inexperience. The main exception to equal shares is therefore not “bad behaviour” in general, but these specific acts.

Each of those acts has its own statutory basis, remedy and burden of proof. Below we explain the rule of equal shares, the provisions on concealment and squandering, the annulment of agreements signed under pressure, how to obtain evidence the other spouse controls, and what to do if the allegation is made against you. For contact arrangements and the conduct of proceedings, see our article on narcissists ແລະກົດຫມາຍ.

ເປັນຫຍັງສານຈຶ່ງພິຈາລະນາການປະພຶດຫຼາຍກວ່າປ້າຍຊື່?

A personality label has no legal consequence and cannot be established in a family case; conduct can. Translate the allegation into facts first, because those facts determine which provision of the Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek, BW) applies and what you must prove.

• Assets that disappear, are transferred to a third party or are not mentioned: the sanction on concealment (Article 3:194(2) BW).
• Debts run up recklessly or value squandered during the marriage: early dissolution of the community (Article 1:109 BW).
• A refusal to produce bank statements, tax returns or company figures: the duty to inform (Article 1:83 BW) and a court order for documents.
• Pressure when a prenuptial agreement or settlement is signed: undue influence (Article 3:44(4) BW).
• ການຂົ່ມຂູ່, ການຂົ່ມຂູ່ ແລະ ການສອດແນມ: ກົດໝາຍອາຍາ, ບ່ອນທີ່ການຕັດສິນລົງໂທດມີຄຸນຄ່າທາງຫຼັກຖານໂດຍກົງໃນຄະດີແພ່ງ.

A submission built around a diagnosis invites a dispute about the diagnosis. A submission built around three unexplained transfers and a missing pension statement invites an explanation that either exists or does not.

ເຈົ້າສາມາດໄດ້ຮັບຫຼາຍກວ່າເຄິ່ງໜຶ່ງຍ້ອນຄູ່ສົມລົດຂອງເຈົ້າປະພຶດຕົວບໍ່ດີບໍ?

As a rule, no. Under Article 1:100 BW spouses share the community equally, and bad behaviour during the marriage is not in itself a reason to deviate.

Article 1:99 BW determines the moment of dissolution, which in a divorce is the day the petition is filed. For marriages concluded on or after 1 January 2018, the default is the limited community of property (beperkte gemeenschap van goederen), ເຊິ່ງຊັບສິນກ່ອນແຕ່ງງານ, ຂອງຂວັນ ແລະ ມໍລະດົກຍັງຄົງຢູ່ນອກ. ການແຕ່ງງານທີ່ມີອາຍຸສູງກວ່າຕົກຢູ່ພາຍໃຕ້ຊຸມຊົນຊັບສິນທົ່ວໄປ, ເວັ້ນເສຍແຕ່ວ່າມີຂໍ້ຕົກລົງກ່ອນແຕ່ງງານ.

The rule of equal shares can only be set aside if applying it would be unacceptable by standards of reasonableness and fairness, and courts apply that exception restrictively. Abuse of right (Article 3:13 BW) is likewise a correction of last resort. The realistic route is to challenge a specific asset, transaction or debt with the provision that fits it.

ກົດລະບຽບໃດແດ່ທີ່ໃຊ້ກັບການປິດບັງ, ການສູນເສຍ ແລະ ການປິດບັງຂໍ້ມູນ?

Three sets of provisions do most of the real work: the sanction on concealment, early dissolution of the community, and the duty to inform. They are far more effective than any argument about character.

Under Article 3:194(2) BW, a co-owner who intentionally conceals, loses or hides assets belonging to the community forfeits his share in those assets to the other co-owner. The entire asset then goes to the other spouse. The requirement is intent: a forgotten account is not enough, but a deliberate omission from an agreed overview of assets can be.

If you married with a prenuptial agreement containing a settlement clause (verrekenbeding), Article 1:135(3) BW contains a similar sanction. A spouse who intentionally conceals an asset that should have been included in the settlement must pay its full value to the other spouse, not just half.

Under Article 1:109 BW you can ask the court to dissolve the community during the marriage if your spouse recklessly incurs debts, squanders community assets, acts clearly against your management of community assets, or refuses to give you the necessary information. It is a rarely used remedy, but it exists for the situation in which value is disappearing while the marriage still formally exists.

Article 1:83 BW obliges spouses to give each other, on request, information about their management of assets and about the state of their assets and debts. That duty continues after the divorce petition is filed. Always make the request in writing and keep it, because a refusal to answer becomes evidence in its own right.

ເຈົ້າສາມາດຍົກເລີກຂໍ້ຕົກລົງທີ່ເຈົ້າໄດ້ເຊັນພາຍໃຕ້ຄວາມກົດດັນໄດ້ບໍ?

ແມ່ນແລ້ວ, ຖ້າທ່ານສາມາດພິສູດໄດ້ວ່າມີອິດທິພົນທີ່ບໍ່ເໝາະສົມ (misbruik van omstandigheden) under Article 3:44(4) BW. The circumstances at the moment of signing decide the case, not the unfairness of the content.

Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements are executed before a civil-law notary, who must inform both parties. That does not make them unassailable. Under Article 3:44(4) BW, a legal act is voidable if one party knows or should know that the other is induced to enter into it by special circumstances, such as a state of emergency, dependence, recklessness, an abnormal mental condition or inexperience, and nevertheless promotes it.

The questions that matter are concrete. How much time was there between the draft and the notary appointment? Was there independent advice, and was there financial dependence or dependence for a residence permit? These facts are usually traceable in correspondence, notary files and calendars, so secure them early.

The same applies to a divorce settlement (echtscheidings ສະດວກສະບາຍ). The burden of proof is on the party seeking annulment, and the right to annul becomes time-barred three years after the influence has ceased (Article 3:52(1)(b) BW), so raise it promptly.

An example to illustrate: a spouse who depends on the other for her residence permit receives a draft prenuptial agreement in Dutch, which she cannot read, two days before the notary appointment, and is told the wedding will be cancelled if she does not sign. Those facts, if documented, can support undue influence. A spouse who had the draft for six weeks and consulted her own lawyer will find that much harder.

ເຈົ້າສ້າງຫຼັກຖານແນວໃດ?

You must prove the facts you rely on, even if the other spouse controls the documents (Article 150 of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure, Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering, Rv). The law gives you two tools to obtain them: a written request under the duty to inform, and a court order for specific documents.

Start with the written request under Article 1:83 BW, addressed to your spouse or their lawyer, and list the documents by name: bank statements over a defined period, mortgage and pension statements, tax returns, the annual accounts and shareholders’ register of any company, and property deeds. Set a deadline of, for example, two weeks.

If documents are withheld, you can ask the court to order access to or copies of specific documents. Since 1 January 2025 this right is laid down in Article 194 Rv and following, for proceedings started on or after that date. A targeted request supported by a concrete indication that the documents exist often succeeds, and the court can attach a penalty payment (ດວງສົມ) to the order. In the division proceedings it can also appoint an expert or hear witnesses.

Four types of material carry the most weight:

• Financial documents: a transfer without an explanation is worth more than any description of the person who made it. A forensic accountant can trace patterns across accounts and companies.
• Written communication: e-mails and messages in which pressure is applied or information is refused are contemporaneous and hard to reinterpret.
• Witness statements: strongest when the witnesses are independent and describe what they saw.
• Records from third parties: notary files, bank correspondence, employer records and police reports.

Obtain evidence lawfully. Reading your spouse’s e-mail, accessing their online banking or placing a tracking device breaches their privacy and can be a criminal offence, such as computer intrusion under Article 138ab of the Dutch Criminal Code. Indirect evidence is admissible: unexplained transfers or a standard of living that does not match the declared income can support a conclusion.

ທ່ານສາມາດໃຊ້ເອກະສານຈາກການດຳເນີນຄະດີອາຍາໄດ້ບໍ?

Yes. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, a final Dutch criminal conviction after defended proceedings is conclusive evidence (ຫຼັກຖານທີ່ຫນ້າສົນໃຈ) of the proven fact in the civil case, subject to evidence to the contrary. A conviction for threats, assault or stalking therefore does not have to be proven again in the family case.

Without a conviction, a police report, the statements taken and records from victim support or a shelter can still be submitted as evidence that the court weighs freely. The civil court is not bound by a decision of the Public Prosecution Service (ລັດຖະມົນຕີ Openbaar) not to prosecute. Terms such as coercive control and gaslighting help organise the facts, but you still have to show the individual acts and their effect.

ເຈົ້າຄວນເຮັດແນວໃດຖ້າມີການກ່າວຫາຕໍ່ເຈົ້າ?

Respond with facts rather than adjectives: insist that the allegation is made specific, and give your explanation with documents. The burden of proof lies with the spouse making the allegation (Article 150 Rv).

Under Article 21 Rv both parties must put forward the relevant facts completely and truthfully, and the court may draw the conclusions it considers appropriate from a breach. That provision cuts both ways and is the one to invoke where an allegation is clearly contradicted by material the other spouse had all along.

Unfounded allegations have consequences. A party that abused procedural rights can be ordered to pay the other party’s actual legal costs, and a claim in tort under Article 6:162 BW is possible where real damage was caused. A judgment obtained by fraud or forged documents can be revoked (ການລ່າສັດ) under Article 382 Rv, within three months after the ground became known (Article 383 Rv). Courts accept abuse of procedural rights only in exceptional cases, such as a manifestly unfounded claim.

What should you check if you raise the allegation?

Your case stands or falls with documents gathered before and during the proceedings. Provisional measures (voorlopige voorzieningen) and a prejudgment attachment (beslag ການອະນຸລັກ) can protect your position in the meantime.

• Have you secured the statements, tax returns, mortgage and pension statements and prenuptial agreement you can lawfully access?
• Have you made a written request for information under Article 1:83 BW and recorded the answer?
• Do you have a dated chronology, with the supporting document beside each entry?
• Is an asset at real risk of disappearing, so that leave for a prejudgment attachment should be requested now?
• If you signed under pressure: is the three-year period of Article 3:52 BW still running?

What should you check if the allegation is made against you?

An allegation of manipulation is easy to make and difficult to answer. Your strongest defence is usually the paper trail.

• Has the other spouse named specific transactions, dates and amounts, or only adjectives?
• Can you document the explanation: the transfer that repaid a family loan, the withdrawal for an agreed expense, the account disclosed in an earlier overview?
• Does the notary file show how much time and information the other spouse had before signing?
• Have you answered requests under Article 1:83 BW completely, so that Article 3:194(2) BW cannot be invoked against you?

What can we do for you with asset division after manipulative conduct?

ຂອງ​ພວກ​ເຮົາ ທະນາຍຄວາມຢ່າຮ້າງ act both for spouses raising these issues and for spouses defending against them, and work with forensic accountants where the financial picture requires it.

• We draft the written request for information under Article 1:83 BW with a precise list of documents.
• We request a court order for specific documents under Article 194 Rv, with a penalty payment where needed.
• We assess whether Article 3:194(2) or 1:135(3) BW applies to a concealed asset and claim it in the division.
• We assess and pursue annulment of a prenuptial agreement or divorce settlement for undue influence.
• We request provisional measures or leave for a prejudgment attachment.

Summary

• ການວິນິດໄສພະຍາດເຫັນແກ່ຕົວແມ່ນບໍ່ຈຳເປັນ ແລະ ບໍ່ມີຜົນກະທົບທາງກົດໝາຍ; ສານພິຈາລະນາການປະພຶດທີ່ເປັນຮູບປະທຳ.
• ກົດລະບຽບແມ່ນການແບ່ງປັນເທົ່າທຽມກັນ (ມາດຕາ 1:100 BW); ພຶດຕິກຳທີ່ບໍ່ດີໃນລະຫວ່າງການແຕ່ງງານບໍ່ໄດ້ໝາຍຄວາມວ່າຈະມີການແບ່ງປັນທີ່ຫຼາຍກວ່ານັ້ນ.
• ຊັບສິນທີ່ຖືກປິດບັງໂດຍເຈດຕະນາຈະຖືກຍຶດໄປໃຫ້ຄູ່ສົມລົດອີກຝ່າຍໜຶ່ງ (ມາດຕາ 3:194(2) BW) ຫຼື ຕ້ອງໄດ້ຮັບການຊົດເຊີຍເຕັມຈຳນວນພາຍໃຕ້ຂໍ້ກຳນົດການຕົກລົງ (ມາດຕາ 1:135(3) BW).
• ສັນຍາທີ່ລົງນາມພາຍໃຕ້ຄວາມກົດດັນສາມາດຖືກຍົກເລີກໄດ້ຍ້ອນອິດທິພົນທີ່ບໍ່ເໝາະສົມ (ມາດຕາ 3:44(4) BW), ແຕ່ທ່ານຕ້ອງພິສູດສະຖານະການໃນເວລາລົງນາມ.
• ທ່ານມີພາລະໃນການພິສູດ, ສະນັ້ນ ໃຫ້ໃຊ້ໜ້າທີ່ໃນການແຈ້ງໃຫ້ຊາບ, ຄຳສັ່ງຂອງສານສຳລັບເອກະສານສະເພາະ ແລະ ຄຳຕັດສິນທາງອາຍາ, ຖ້າມີ.

ຄໍາ​ຖາມ​ທີ່​ຖືກ​ຖາມ​ເລື້ອຍໆ