<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Will the bucks fizzle out?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/</link>
	<description>Where Family Law Meets Family Life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 17:28:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Family law, pre-nups and Sir Mark Potter</title>
		<link>http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Family law, pre-nups and Sir Mark Potter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:34:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>[...] I argued then, giving full, automatic legal effect to pre-nups would not lead to greater fairness, but to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I argued then, giving full, automatic legal effect to pre-nups would not lead to greater fairness, but to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: “Prenuptial agreements: a rethink required” &#124; sueincourt.com</title>
		<link>http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>“Prenuptial agreements: a rethink required” &#124; sueincourt.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:46:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] Sharp canters through current law, including some well known cases such as Crossley v Crossley,(2008) 1FLR1467, where predictably the Court of Appeal indicated it was likely they would uphold [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Sharp canters through current law, including some well known cases such as Crossley v Crossley,(2008) 1FLR1467, where predictably the Court of Appeal indicated it was likely they would uphold [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: “Prenuptial agreements: a rethink required”</title>
		<link>http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>“Prenuptial agreements: a rethink required”</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 19:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2007/12/20/when-the-bucks-fizzle-out/#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] Sharp canters through current law, including some well known cases such as Crossley v Crossley,(2008) 1FLR1467, where predictably the Court of Appeal indicated it was likely they would uphold [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Sharp canters through current law, including some well known cases such as Crossley v Crossley,(2008) 1FLR1467, where predictably the Court of Appeal indicated it was likely they would uphold [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

