Tegen beter weten in blijft eiseres

Tegen beter weten in blijft eiseres trachten om de feiten te verdraaien,door o.a. :

de inhoud van de notariele akte volledig naast zich neer te leggen;

voor te houden dat uit de correspondentie van de notaris zou bliken dat partijen op 24mei 2014(?)een vereffening-verdeling voorzien zouden hebben mits een opleg van 80,000€ terwiji de notaris net het tegenovergestelde zegt en er zelfs nooit een ontwerp van vereffening-verdeling werd opgesteld waarin een opleg van 80,000€ werd vermeld;

te beweren dat concluant stelt dat er nooit een opleg werd overeengekomen,terwiji concluant steeds heeft gezegd dat de overeengekomen opleg van 20.500€ voor de ondertekening van de akte werd betaald, zodat deze niet diende te worden vermeld

thans te verwijzen naar haar emailverkeer met de notaris anderhalf jaar na de ondertekening van de notariele akte om daaruit trachten af te leiden dat er steeds discussie zou geweest zijin over het bedrag van de opleg.

結果 (英語) 1:

Against my better judgment the plaintiff continues to twist the facts, try by, amongst others:the content of the employment to ignore completely;to keep that from the correspondence of the notary would bliken that parties on 24mei 2014 (?) a settlement would have provided a distribution with lay-on by 80,000 € whereas the notary says just the opposite and there never even a draft settlement distribution was drawn up in which a lay-on by 80,000 € was mentioned;claiming that concluant States that there has never been a lay-on was agreed, whereas concluant has always said that the agreed lay-on of € 20,500 for the signing of the Act was paid, so this should not be mentioned now referring to her email traffic with the notary a year and a half after the signature of the employment to seek that more discussion would've been zijin on the amount of the lay-on.

結果 (英語) 2:

Against his better judgment remains plaintiff attempt to distort the facts, by among other things: the content of laying the notarial deed has completely ignored, to keep it from the correspondence of the notary would look back parties on 24mei 2014 (?) liquidation distribution would have provided if a surcharge of € 80,000 terwiji notary just say the opposite and never even drawn up a draft of liquidation and division in which a surcharge of € 80,000 was mentioned, claiming that concluant states that there is never a bearing was agreed terwiji concluant has always said that the agreed surcharge of € 20,500 for the signing of the deed was paid, so they did not have to be reported to now refer to her e-mail traffic with the notary and a half years after the signing of the notarial deed to there trying to infer that there has been increasing discussion would Zijin on the amount of the support.

結果 (英語) 3:

The applicant continues to seek to distort the facts,by among others :

the contents of the instrument fully to;

for that from the correspondence of the notary would bliken that parties on 24 May 2014 ( ? )a settlement-distribution provided would have provided that a last minute of 80,000€ Terwiji the notary says exactly the opposite and there never even a draft of settlement-distribution was drawn up in which a last minute of 80,000€ was mentioned;

to claim that concluant says that there was never a last minute agreed,terwiji concluant has always said that the agreed last minute of 20.500€ for the signing of the act was paid,So that this should not be mentioned

now to refer to its e-mail exchange with the notary a half year after the signing of the instrument to the endeavor to lead that discussion would still have been inserted on the amount of the last minute.